Flippanarchy
Flippant Anarchism. A lighter take on social criticism with the aim of agitation.
Post humorous takes on capitalism and the states which prop it up. Memes, shitposting, screenshots of humorous good takes, discussions making fun of some reactionary online, it all works.
This community is anarchist-flavored. Reactionary takes won't be tolerated.
Don't take yourselves too seriously. Serious posts go to !anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Rules
-
If you post images with text, endeavour to provide the alt-text
-
If the image is a crosspost from an OP, Provide the source.
-
Absolutely no right-wing jokes. This includes "Anarcho"-Capitalist concepts.
-
Absolutely no redfash jokes. This includes anything that props up the capitalist ruling classes pretending to be communists.
-
No bigotry whatsoever. See instance rules.
-
This is an anarchist comm. You don't have to be an anarchist to post, but you should at least understand what anarchism actually is. We're not here to educate you.
-
No shaming people for being anti-electoralism. This should be obvious from the above point but apparently we need to make it obvious to the turbolibs who can't control themselves. You have the rest of lemmy to moralize.
Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.
view the rest of the comments
Source: you made it the fuck up, lmao. Repeating Red Scare fearmongering about the "evil commies" and wielding it like a club, regardless of the truth of the matter, is how you operate. You'll go to any lengths to disavow socialism in action.
The bolsheviks were very popular, throughout their existence, to the point that George Orwell's Animal Farm's main critique is the assumption that the Russian working class simply went along with the bolsheviks because they were too stupid to know any better. Liberals and fascists had to invent conspiracy theories of communist mind control in order to explain the popularity of socialism while painting it as the supreme evil.
The bolsheviks were chosen because Marxism is correct, and the bolsheviks represented both the workers and the peasantry. The Mensheviks represented only the petite bourgeoisie, the Left SRs were more popular among the peasantry, and the Right SRs supported the outright bourgeoisie. The bolsheviks, on the other hand, were able to unite the workers and peasants soviets and won the Russian Civil War, creating the world's first socialist state, which managed to:
The bolsheviks weren't a "lesser evil," they were immensely popular, to the point that today the vast majority of those still alive that lived in the USSR want it back.
You just sabotaged your last trace of credibility for approaching the subject rationally.
Marxism is a range of discourse that originated with a fallible individual and whose continuation has been by other fallible individuals who naturally are not in full agreement.
It is not an absolute truth or universal solution.
Marxism isn't an absolute, static truth, but an effective framework for understanding and changing the world. Was Marx (or Lenin) 100% correct? Of course not, merely overwhelmingly correct, but Lenin's application of Marxism led to correctly analyzing the situation and establishing socialism.
Socialism was never established in Russia, and "correctly analyzing the situation" is too vague to be meaningful.
What do you think was done correctly that would not have been done so without Marxism?
Socialism was established in Russia, public ownership was the principle aspect of the soviet economy and the working classes were in control of the state. Correctly analyzing the situation is vague, as it necessarily is due to being a short lemmy comment. However, some examples of this, and their connection to Marxism, are as follows:
Recognition of World War I as an inter-imperialist war, therefore leveraging the unpopularity of the war and the weakness of the Russian state to successful revolution
Recognition of the peasantry as capable of allying with the industrial proletariat, which groups like the Mensheviks distrusted
The establishment of a socialist state to defend the gains of the revolution, allowing the USSR to outlast the dozen+ capitalist nations invading it at its inception
Proper engagement with the trade unions and other groups, combining legal and illegal work, without resorting to adventurist terrorism like the left SRs
The recognition of the dialectical relationship between theory and practice, which groups like the left SRs rejected in favor of sponteniety
And more. Is it possible that revolution could have been won another way? Yes. Did it work, and was this method applied successfully in China, Vietnam, Cuba, and many more examples throughout the world? Also yes.
I am sorry, but you are returning nonsense apologetics.
Russian workers obviously never controlled the economy.
They fundamentally did, repeating that they didn't like a mantra isn't a point, nor is said mantra justified by claiming it's "obvious." Again, public ownership was the principle aspect of the economy, and the working classes were in control of the state. This is socialism as it exists in the real world, in concrete form. Both Is the Red Flag Flying? The Political Economy of the Soviet Union by Albert Syzmanski and This Soviet World by Anna Louise Strong are good places to start with looking at how the economy of the soviet union functioned.
An excerpt from the latter:
It may not be your preferred model of socialism, but it was real, and qualitatively different from capitalism. Trying to claim it isn't the same as the "pure" socialism in our heads doesn't change that material reality, socialism isn't mystical but a material process.
My god are you naive 🤦
Nope 👍