this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2026
22 points (89.3% liked)
Chapotraphouse
14263 readers
713 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Communism will not be achievable until it is a global project. You also are treating "countries" as a monolith, with the entirety of the "country" being the problem rather than its ruling class. That is liberal idealism and totally lacking class consciousness. We're talking about class conflict here, are all the working class people within a country responsible for what their bourgeoisie does to keep them oppressed? In a world where socialism is thriving and capitalism is on its back foot, it would not be materialist let alone Marxist to just leave capitalist oppressed nations to their own devices, even if it's true what you say (and I don't think it is) that you can't peacefully address the rotten superstructure even though you can solve the base by putting the means of production in the hands of the working class.
In a sense the premise I laid out is that most of the world is communist and therefore a global project, but self-determination is a part of that. Its ideal and most peaceful process is a voluntary union, perhaps a confederation, leading to the withering away of the state.
Comically, this is almost exactly the debate about socialist self-determination that I had in mind.
Communism is absolutely a global project, but revolution won't happen simultaneously overnight, it historically sprung within states and then expanded through influence, support for socialists abroad, and militarily. I do treat the history and superstructure of certain countries as a hurdle that will delay the arrival and propagation of communism.
You cannot do this without grassroots communist revolutions, you can at best support preexisting movements, but you need a regional vanguard party for this to happen, and this will likely come later in some countries very biased against communism by nationalism and racism. Working class people in Poland and Estonia were given the means of production and yet never overcame the anti-Russian racism despite 5 decades without a local owning class creating such propaganda. A revolution imposed from abroad is ill-equipped to deal with such tensions and issues, and the opposite strategy of letting people come to "their own conclusions" under world where Socialism dominates the global geopolitics, economy and propaganda apparatus, is much more likely to bring the conditions for revolution in such countries.
And yet Estonia was made part of the USSR. Should it not have been? Should the Soviets not sought to unionize more countries like the one you're using as an example of a country with a racist and reactionary working class? Should any country that doesn't have a sufficient amount of the populous amenable to socialism be "isolate[d] and sanction[ed] said countries the way Cuba has been"? Which brings up another question, what is enough support, where do you draw the line as to how much of the population and by what metric is enough to warrant struggling to expand the revolution there rather than leaving their working class to keep suffering?
In a world dominated by socialism, it is ridiculous to think no such parties would exist in every country, and where they don't, it would not be from a lack of trying, but from their immediate destruction by their state (as what happens in the US, most famously with the Black Panthers).
The comment you were responding to was "Seems like a socialist world would not let millions of people suffer like that" and it is absolutely true. No one is saying revolution will "happen spontaneously and overnight," but if a world where more countries operated like Cuba does today, or in a world where the Soviet Union spread throughout MENA and Europe, it makes no sense from a Marxist, materialist perspective, that they would simply leave any countries with a more highly propagandized public to simply suffer without any kind of intervention.