This exactly. The only reason it even works at all is because they are building on top of an already functioning imperial system. Fascists are like prions emerging from within and taking over a far more competent - and more subtly evil - host, and making it lash out violently while melting its brain into goo. Even if it is not rooted out it's still doomed to kill its host and by extension, itself.
Schmoo
joined 2 years ago
Perhaps you should reflect on why you feel the need to play defense for establishment Democrats despite claiming to support the paradigm shift that Zohran Mamdani represents. You have been obsessively commenting all over this thread trying to deflect criticism of the DNC by gaslighting people into believing that the DNC are all supporting Zohran Mamdani and that all these centrists coming out against him are outsiders. Are you secretly a campaign consultant for Biden or something?
extracting rent
That's their right
lemmy.ml
Have I discovered a rare pro-capitalist user of lemmy.ml?
I remember when I had been fooled into believing it was.
Mix them in. We need to get out of the mindset that animation is not deserving of the same respect as live action.
Some people are, it's called antitheism. I confess when I was an edgy 16yo I was like that, but I had just left a religious cult so don't judge me too harshly.
That doesn't mean the character of an economy that is dominated by public ownership is capitalist, either, just that it is on the "socialist road," ie it is socialist, and working its way to higher levels of socialization until communism is achieved.
This is the crux of the disagreement between anarchists and MLs. I would argue that state ownership - if the state does not adequately represent the will of the people - is not public ownership. A hierarchical state with a flawed and bureaucratic democracy that is prone to corruption inevitably creates and maintains a class of bureaucrats with social, political, and economic privilege. The state - in order to preserve itself - maintains a monopoly on collective ownership, preventing workers from organizing on their own terms.
This is what anarchists mean when they call something "state capitalist." They are arguing that the state itself is a private entity pretending to represent the will of the people.
They're not the same, but it's easy to see how people become too jaded and cynical to vote.
I appreciate the well thought out response. My main point of contention is the enforcement mechanism. I agree with point 3 as a strategy, and I have actually participated in groups that follow this general principle, but I have always had the option to simply leave and find another group or form my own. The problem arises when the group is the only permissible form of organization (such as, for example, if it is the one party in a one-party state). You actually see this problem in China, when the state cracks down on workers who attempt to organize on their own terms by forming independent unions. I see this as an unambiguous moral failing of the Chinese state, and is an issue on which I will not budge. Bureaucracy makes determining the will of the majority complicated (no democracy is perfect), but even if it is indeed the will of the majority, tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.
There are things more important than unity. I do not believe that a better world must necessarily come at the cost of individual autonomy.
It's still a net positive for candidates like Mamdani to achieve electoral victories. Even if you believe that a true socialist can never make it to a high enough office to establish a socialist government (which I agree is likely correct), making the attempt and achieving some reforms in the face of very public resistance from the bourgeoisie is great for class consciousness. It sends the message "hey, it actually is possible to improve your material conditions, and the rich really don't want it to happen." Give people a taste and they will want more, which is why the establishment is so terrified of Zohran Mamdani.
Personally, I think that Democratic Centralism is too strict. I understand the idea behind ensuring the subordination of the minority to the majority, but as the party grows and especially after it seizes state power that subordination becomes enforced, and at that point it becomes oppression. It doesn't get rid of factions either, it just hides them and fosters resentment towards the majority faction.
Just so we're clear on what we're talking about, here are the tenets of Democratic Centralism as I understand them:
- That all directing bodies of the Party, from top to bottom, shall be elected.
- That Party bodies shall give periodical accounts of their activities to their respective Party organization.
- That there shall be strict Party discipline and the subordination of the minority to the majority.
- That all decisions of higher bodies shall be absolutely binding on lower bodies and on all Party members.
I believe that point 3 should be a suggestion, and never enforced. It should be up to the individual whether any given disagreement is enough to warrant going their own way, and an option should be given to "stand aside" in cases where someone would prefer not to participate in an action but otherwise wants to remain with the group.
Point 4 is backwards IMO, and a recipe for authoritarianism. Any sort of elected authority should always be instantly recallable by the electorate, and any "lower" body should always have the autonomy to make their own decisions.
Factionalism is not a bad thing if you embrace it rather than trying to fight it.
More pictures available if needed. I broke a few open that were in rougher shape and they are solid white and spongy all the way through. Found in open woods in West Kentucky.
Thinking about frying these up and seeing how they taste but want a bit more assurance that I'm not taking a huge risk doing so. I couldn't find these in my National Audubon Society Field Guide so I'm a bit reluctant to take the chance.
The underside instantly darkens when scratched.
More angles here:
I think it might be a green-spored parasol which is poisonous, but it's hard to tell at this stage. Was hoping it's something edible because there's lots of them and they're massive.
view more: next ›
Then call for massive, unprecedented, and devastating civil action rather than portending doom. Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will.