>>2386083> it's a textbook on political economy. a textbook.Thatβs exactly the problem
Instead of going directly to the source of communist theory, Marx, Engels, Lenin, even latter writers such as Perry Anderson who did an in-depth analysis of the slave and feudal modes of production, he went directly to the simplest, shallowest, economically determinist explanations of human historical development, in a text crafted, primarily, to train Soviet citizens into a peculiar form of Marxism that is not at all a ruthless criticism of all that exists and instead the ideological maintenance of the present state of things (in the USSR)
> yes i can. the first is that state capitalism (as Bukharin used it) is not applicable to the Soviet union (which you would know had you read his economics of the transitional period).Leftcoms are not referring to state capitalism as Bukharin mentioned it, and you have still not said what is βbad faithβ about such a criticism, only reiterated that you disagree. We know you disagree. That does not make our criticism bad faith. Left-communism isnβt an attempt to make Stalinists feel bad.
> social democracy" is an umbrella term used equal out regimes from the soviet to fucking hitler.Not at all, the USSR is often written off as a social democracy by Leftcoms because the vast majority of the rhetoric MLs draft in its defense amount to defending its welfare system and state monopoly and calling both these things socialist, yet they were not conflated with βsocialismβ at all until MLs needed to defend themselves against socialist critics, or perhaps more accurately they were recognized as not socialist in nature once social democratic reforms were achieved in the imperial core and threatened capital in no way, shape, or form.
The folly lies upon MLs themselves, whose defense of socialism pushes them to uphold the gains brought forth by capitalβs historical advance (industrialization, βmodernizationβ, βnational sovereigntyβ, modern science, mass state funded welfare) with socialism, whose only actual nature (socialismβs) is the abolition of capitalβs mediations on the basis and utilization of its historical progress. The problem is that MLs perfectly mirror liberal critics when they argue that capitalism is sociali
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.