Cowbee [he/they]

Socialism takes advanced, industrial production beyond the profit motive and into a consciously planned and pro-social direction. You can have industrial scale without having capitalism.

A trend that will only continue to grow.

Nope, all strawman arguments.

1. You said organizing is easier under the DNC. I pointed out that this is factually false, which you take to mean I prefer the GOP outright.

2. You keep trying to pretend I said we shouldn’t vote. I said we should vote for communist parties. You keep denying this, though, believing the only utility of electoralism to be in getting the DNC into power.

Your point about keeping the DNC in power logically leads to accelerationism. Rather than actually engage with the points I brought, you proceeded to strawman the shit out of my points and then complain that I’m not a reformist. You claim I’ve brought no evidence despite bringing clear evidence, and yourself no counter-evidence.

Really not sure what you’re trying to accomplish. You disagree with revolutionary praxis as worthwhile, while also saying I’m doing revolutionary praxis wrong by not voting for the accelerationist party.

I never said the Republicans are better for a communist revolution, I said organizing is paradoxically easier under Republicans because revolutionary sentiment is higher. This does not mean supporting Republicans is correct, as this alienates communists from the rest of the proletariat. I simply said the DNC is the more competent caretaker of the empire, and therefore any elevation of them over Republicans as somehow better for people is just sacrificing the victims of empire.

As for saying “voting for communists doesn’t do anything,” that’s also a lie. I said it advances revolutionary consciousness. If this is “nothing” for you, then you are in fact reformist over revolutionary, and therefore we can see your support of the DNC electorally through that lense, essentially you support the DNC because you think this is the best path to progress. This means you do support the genocidal imperialists, even if you’d rather they not commit genocide and imperialism.

I gave lots of evidence, see the Russian Revolution. Through participation in bourgeois elections, the Bolsheviks were able to expose the sham of liberal democracy in favor of soviet democracy. This allowed them to dissolve the provisional government and establish the Soviet government as the legitimate government.

Lemmy.ml’s meme comm allows political memes.

You’re arguing for voting for the democrats, which is the more competent party for maintaining imperialism. This is a clearly accelerationist stance, trying to speed up centralization of capital and therefore speed up crisis. Organizing isn’t any easier under the DNC, so this is an accelerationist stance.

As for why we should vote for communist parties, I already explained. This helps raise revolutionary consciousness. That is the point. Electoral politics will never alone establish socialism, so the best use of it is to help raise the conditions of class consciousness.

Your immediate goal being to keep the GOP out of power is missing the campfire for the forest fire around you. You want to keep the more competent genocidal imperialists in power, and that is the focus of your immediate praxis. This is accelerationism masked behind a guise of “harm reduction,” when actual harm reduction is gained through collective struggle and establishment of groups to directly protect marginalized groups. Foreign marginalized groups do not seem to matter to you.

I haven’t seen evidence for accelerationism working in any country, meanwhile communist participation in bourgeois elections has worked in many places for increasing revolutionary consciousness. I don’t know why you’re pretending I said we shouldn’t vote, I explicitly said voting for communist parties is a good thing. For the GOP, I said your argument about organizing being easier under the DNC is wrong, not that voting for the GOP is correct.

As it stands, I have good historical evidence of Lenin being correct, and you have no evidence of accelerationist strategies being correct.

This has been a successful strategy in existing socialist states, including the Russian revolution. You aren’t doing “harm reduction,” you’re morally justifying accelerationism to yourself.

What do you think “work” means? If you mean that we cannot change the system by voting for communists alone, then sure, that doesn’t work. Communist parties participating in elections, bringing popular policy to the forefront, and radicalizing the working classes? That absolutely works and is absolutely useful.

The fact of the matter is that your accelerationism already throws marginalized people under the bus by putting the more competent imperialists in power, directly, without fronting every chance to depose the imperialists of both parties. The DNC doesn’t even protect domestic marginalized peoples, and is a more capable party for dominating the global south for longer.

Voter reform cannot actually gain systemic change. It’s a carrot used to keep people under the impression that gaining it will fix the system and not require revolution.

In that case, since I am not an accelerationist, I believe it to be more valuable to bring about revolution by voting for communist/socialist parties than to try to extend the effectiveness of imperialism by entrenching the democrats. If communists and socialists front policy that is widely popular yet consistently loses to the DNC and GOP, or wins and is defanged by capitalists and the state, this increases revolutionary potential by correctly showing the working classes why electoralism is a dead-end. Entrenching the DNC retains the illusion that the system can be reformed.

When did I make that argument to begin with? My point was that voting is less than the bare minimum. My point was never that “voting actively damages the movement.” I advocate voting for communist parties, even if they never win, as it helps solidify the fact that liberal democracy cannot bring systemic change.

Are you confusing my points for someone else?

I agree, but not for the reasons you likely believe. The Great Leap Forward ultimately improved food security and industrial capacity, even if it was mishandled and ran into problems. By the end of the Great Leap Forward, industrial output had doubled as compared to before, and agricultural output was also higher (though not quite as much).

Against the hypothetical? Or in general?

Nah, accelerationism would be supporting the DNC. Accelerationism isn’t “ruin everything,” it’s a strategy that says that if capitalism continuing results in crisis, we should have the most competent managers of empire in the front seat. This accelerates capital accumulation and crisis. I also said I am not in favor of the “ruin everything” tactic either.

That’s why I am a revolutionary, and I don’t support the DNC nor GOP. I told you why I wouldn’t vote for the GOP nor DNC. Sacrificing minority groups is unnacceptable, and climate change is an ever-present danger. That’s why revolution is necessary.

You’re probably referencing the Nazi bar that stalks communists at the end there, for what reason I don’t know.

What point were you trying to illustrate? That it would be strategically better to organize under a milquetoast liberal regime than a republican regime? My response is how I already responded, neither is acceptable and both would pivot to open fascism against revolution if it actually broke out.

Hell, in modern days, organizing under the GOP is paradoxically easier because they are less competent managers of empire, and spark more discontent among the populace, driving support for revolutionary change. I would never argue for voting for the GOP though, so that’s why I support third party voting, at most.

It’s actually pretty accurate, lmao. The meme is saying dark green is the best, not light green, though RSF treats light green as the best. That’s the source of the misalignment. The meme puts Canada and the Nordics at the top, same as RSF (generally).

Sure, it happens to corroborate what we know about the state of conscription in Ukraine.

All clocks are “broken,” then. They all serve their own interests, that means we have to identify what they are to figure out how to read them. The fact that Ukrainians are struggling, many are fighting back against conscription vans, etc. is both convenient to Russia and actually true. That doesn’t mean everything RT says is correct 100%, but it does mean that not everything pro-Russia or anti-Ukraine from Russian media is wrong.

For example, I know BBC frequently outright lies and fabricates information about China. This is well-documented, they even add gray or yellow filters to video to make it seem scarier. That doesn’t mean they are never correct.

As much as BBC is pure British propaganda, sure. “Press freedom indexes” generally measure how privatized the press is, it doesn’t actually measure how truthful the press is. Russian press is fully capable of presenting true accounts.

I don’t really think it’s a secret that this is a Russian POV, that doesn’t mean it’s worthless.