2
Revolution in the US
(lemmygrad.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2022
2 points (75.0% liked)
GenZedong
4251 readers
6 users here now
This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
- No bigotry, anti-communism, pro-imperialism or ultra-leftism (anti-AES)
- We support indigenous liberation as the primary contradiction in settler colonies like the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Israel
- If you post an archived link (excluding archive.org), include the URL of the original article as well
- Unless it's an obvious shitpost, include relevant sources
- For articles behind paywalls, try to include the text in the post
- Mark all posts containing NSFW images as NSFW (including things like Nazi imagery)
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
There's been a good amount of threads with this question you can search for that have great answers, but IMO the US and the rest of the imperial core, as per Lenin's law that capitalism breaks at the weakest links in the chain, will be the very last countries on earth to have a revolution.
The US empire will fade out of history the same way the British and Roman empires did, with a pathetic, hundreds of years long whiny decline into political turmoil and international obscurity, while it eats itself internally and depopulates as its poor leave or are sacrificed on the altar.
Anarchists can't have a successful revolution because they can't organize installing a light bulb, let alone organizing cross-industry production or a coordinated military defense of a city. It had its go in the 19th and 20th century and failed, and should only be studied by historians as an intellectual curiosity, like blanquism.
No way USA lasts more than a few decades more, about 50 years, let alone centuries
It might seem that way when you look at its poverty and increasing unrest, but its political institutions are very stable, its ruling classes are extremely well protected, its protest movements are extremely unorganized, its labor movement died by the 1970s and has been on life support ever since. I've lived in US cities of hundreds of thousands of people, and we can barely scrape together 5 dedicated communists, whereas police often outnumber protesters, and have stations built like fortresses.
Its the most anticommunist country on the planet, and people don't know of alternatives to bourgeois "democracy". Its people are so indoctrinated, that they even vote for candidates who are trying to kill them: nearly all of my boomer family members have major health problems, yet somehow think the US has "socialist medical care", and that we need to get rid of it.
I'd wish the U.S. ended in 5 years, so I won't hold my breath for the U.S. ending in 50 years, but I'd love to be wrong.
What about Anarcho-Syndicalists? That structure is a sort of decentralized command economy, instead of the description given in that link of a "network of free contracts".
There has never been a successful ansyn revolution or economy, because a "decentralized command economy" doesn't make any sense, and is no different from "freedom to refuse" in practice. Read the above article.
Lets say a war effort needs x amount of steel refined from a certain region, so that another region can produce tanks. A "decentralized" system gives each region the autonomy to refuse meeting quotas or collaborating, and the whole thing falls apart.