this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
1901 points (97.6% liked)
memes
10567 readers
5096 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- [email protected] : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- [email protected] : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- [email protected] : Linux themed memes
- [email protected] : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don’t agree with this. Worker coops exists in many places in Europe, and in said continent, some key industries are heavily controlled by the government.
In my country, Canada, we socialized healthcare without any revolution.
Down south, they had the labour movement that gave us the 40 hour week, the weekend and labour laws all throughout unionization and putting pressure on the capitalist class without “revolutionary pressure”, unless unionization is what you mean by revolutionary pressure. If so, then I agree.
You're ignoring that these advancements in labor movements came as concessions from the bourgeoisie in the context of trying to prevent what happened in Russia from happening in Canada and the US.
I think we are splitting hairs.
I’m saying it’s possible within the confines of the system. In the US and Canada it was done by the confides of the system.
I’m good with having a revolution as the last resort, just not the first resort.
I'm saying there is no actual basis for it being possible within the system, though, unless there is revolutionary pressure, and even then this is only temporary and still requires revolution. That's why FDR's safety nets are vestigial at this point.
Revolution isn't the goal, but it remains the only proven tool.
Well I guess that’s where we fundamentally disagree.
I just want us to do more of what we did with the 1930s because that helped give us the prosperity we saw past WWII.
I want that because I know it works, not saying a revolution can’t work, but why risk things in these polarizing times?
Then you need
The recent strong example of a communist revolution gave us the anti-communist revolution. It took us 30 fucking years though. And the cost of this little detour can still be felt today. We're at least 2 generations of progress behind, compared to our western peers.
The recent strong example of a Communist Revolution created the conditions for FDR and other Social Democrats to greatly expand protections for workers via concessions.
Yes, whereas we actually don’t know what we need for a proper revolution.
So imo that still a far safer bet because it has happened successfully before.
What do you mean by "we don't know what we need for a proper revolution?" Can we not look to the centuries of successful revolutions, and see how their conditions are similar and different from our own? Moreover, where are you hoping will be the next required large country to have a Communist revolution, and why can't it be your country?
Well, I meant a socialist revolution.
Also, a lot of revolutions don’t go the way they intended.
You know, the first French Revolution gave France napoleon, who was a dictator and only because he was constantly at war that he was unable to hold on to power.
Not every revolution accomplishes its goals so calling all of them successful is a stretch.
Idk if we need new examples, there has been so many example already.
But again I would like to reiterate, imo socialist revolution can work, but it’s the brute force, bloody and inefficient method that would never be my first pick if I have options.
Genuinely, what is the practical distinction between a Communist or Socialist revolution in the context of an international example for the domestic working class?
Furthermore, the French Revolution ultimately toppled the monarchy. It was not sunshine and roses, but succeeded in transitioning from feudalism to Capitalism. Additionally, I did not say every revolution was successful, but instead that we have many examples of successful revolutions.
Moreover, you have not established that you have options. You have no examples of Social Democracy existing in a manner that isn't temporary, and wasn't given rise to by the example of a much larger revolution like the Russian Revolution the working class could have followed in the footsteps of had the bourgeoisie not made concessions. This historical context is crucial to understanding what does and does not work!