this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2024
464 points (82.0% liked)

Late Stage Capitalism

196 readers
882 users here now

A place for for news, discussion, memes, and links criticizing capitalism and advancing viewpoints that challenge liberal capitalist ideology. That means any support for any liberal capitalist political party (like the Democrats) is strictly prohibited.

A zero-tolerance policy for bigotry of any kind. Failure to respect this will result in a ban.

RULES:

1 Understand the left starts at anti-capitalism.

2 No Trolling

3 No capitalist apologia, anti-socialism, or liberalism. Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.

4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or 'wasted votes on 3rd party' is lessor evil rhetoric.

5 No bigotry, no racism, sexism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, or any type of prejudice.

6 Be civil in comments and no accusations of being a bot, 'paid by Putin,' etc.

founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
464
submitted 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) by K1nsey6 to c/latestagecapitalism
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] VerbFlow 2 points 1 day ago

I just wanted to put a quote from Blackshirts and Reds here. Chapter 9 as a whole has some very prescient parts:

To the extent that class is accorded any attention in academic social science, pop sociology, and media commentary, it is as a kind of demographic trait or occupational status. So sociologists refer to “upper-middle,” “lower-middle,” and the like. Reduced to a demographic trait, one’s class affiliation certainly can seem to have relatively low political salience. Society itself becomes little more than a pluralistic configuration of status groups. Class is not a taboo subject if divorced from capitalism’s exploitative accumulation process.

Both mainstream social scientists and “left” ABC [Anything-But-Class] theorists fail to consider the dynamic interrelationship that gives classes their significance. In contrast, Marxists treat class as the key concept in an entire social order known as capitalism (or feudalism or slavery), centering around the ownership of the means of production (factories, mines, oil wells, agribusinesses, media conglomerates, and the like) and the need—if one lacks ownership—to sell one’s labor on terms that are highly favorable to the employer.

...

To support their view that class (in the Marxist sense) is passé, the ABC theorists repeatedly assert that there is not going to be a workers’ revolution in the United States in the foreseeable future. (I heard this sentiment expressed at three different panels during a “Gramsci conference” at Amherst, Massachusetts, in April 1987.) Even if we agree with this prophecy, we might still wonder how it becomes grounds for rejecting class analysis and for concluding that there is no such thing as exploitation of labor by capital and no opposition from people who work for a living.

Class has a dynamic that goes beyond its immediate visibility. Whether we are aware of it or not, class realities permeate our society, determining much about our capacity to pursue our own interests. Class power is a factor in setting the political agenda,

selecting leaders,

reporting the news, funding science and education, distributing health care, mistreating the environment, depressing wages, resisting racial and gender equality, marketing entertainment and the arts, propagating religious messages, suppressing dissidence, and defining social reality itself.

ABC theorists see the working class as not only incapable of revolution but as on the way out, declining in significance as a social formation. Anyone who still thinks that class is of primary importance is labeled a diehard Marxist, guilty of “economism” and “reductionism” and unable to keep up with the “post-Marxist,” “post-structuralist,” “post-industrialist,” “post-capitalist,” “post-modernist,” and “post-deconstructionist” times.

It is ironic that some left intellectuals should deem class struggle to be largely irrelevant at the very time class power is becoming increasingly transparent, at the very time corporate concentration and profit accumulation is more rapacious than ever, and the tax system has become more regressive and oppressive, the upward transfer of income and wealth has accelerated, public sector assets are being privatized, corporate money exercises an increasing control over the political process, people at home and abroad are working harder for less, and throughout the world poverty is growing at a faster rate than overall population.

This, I think, has a lot to do with Dems today, esp. with Chuck Schumer appealing to "moderate Republicans in the suburbs in Philadelphia", which blatantly shows how little they understand class, even in an election--and as we've seen, even when a fascist could win instead. The dismantling of class conscious has been a disaster for the world. This is especially the case as people conflate hardworking intellectuals with the bourgeoise, and misconstrue legitimate protests against state greviances as a "color revolution".

[–] RangerJosie 33 points 4 days ago (2 children)

There is no single group of people on the planet Earth as adept at shitting and falling back in it as the Democrats.

They turned "Snatching Defeat from the Jaws of Victory" into an artform.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago (1 children)

This why people think they are a psyop.

[–] RangerJosie 8 points 4 days ago

I don't need convincing. They showed me in 2016 that they're controlled opposition. Admitted it in court.

Wilding v. DNC Services Corp.

Google it for yourself.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 days ago

I don't think there has ever, in history, been a group capable of doing that at this scale other than the Democratic Party. They are the greatest to ever do it.

[–] [email protected] 87 points 5 days ago (12 children)

“So what you’re saying is we need to move further to the right.”

  • Democrats and pundits
[–] jaggedrobotpubes 8 points 4 days ago

Our constituents' rent went up 15% and their wages stayed the same, so everything is basically ok.

[–] freshcow 38 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Exactly the message I expect them to take away from this, if 2016 and 2020 are any indication. Zero introspection.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 69 points 5 days ago (10 children)

To be fair, the Republicans did all these same things and won all three branches, so...

[–] IndustryStandard 37 points 5 days ago

Turns out people who want those things can vote for Republicans. Who offer more of those things!

And the people who did not want those things stayed home.

[–] AFaithfulNihilist 43 points 5 days ago

It shouldn't have to be repeated so often that maybe Republican voters aren't who the Democratic party needs to be gearing itself to attract.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] tired_n_bored 11 points 4 days ago (4 children)

I don't get it. Yeah all of these things are horrible but the other choice is literally Hitler. We could say the same thing about them but we didn't win

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The term "literally Hitler" is a lot less impactful when democrats have been complicit in genocide for an entire year.

If Trump did what Biden did, I have no doubt you would have called him literally Hitler for it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 5 days ago (10 children)

Either you are able to vote on harm reduction alone, knowing that your pick isn't ideal...

Or you are so ideologically locked in that nothing but "your brand" is enough.

Harris sucks but the vote was to keep MORE, NEW people from being at risk.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Trump won both times because he departed from GOP ideology, not his voters. Harm reduction doesn't get voters to the polls.

This isn't about you and me. A campaign centered around "stop this person" is just less effective than one centered around "let's start doing this".

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Furbag 18 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Republicans always seem to win with shitty candidates because they understand this intrinsically. They do not care that DJT is an utter buffoon, they care that he will enact the shit they want, and now they're getting it because they refused to stay home. As the saying goes: Democrats want to fall in love, Republicans want to fall in line.

So Republicans backed their guy, just like they did the last two elections, and there was no line that could not be crossed that would convince even a fraction of Republicans to not vote. Meanwhile, virtue signaling lefties desperately tried to convince me for months that I shouldn't vote for Biden OR Harris because they were both equally culpable for a genocide that is happening halfway across the world, as if Trump would have been any better.

Yeah, we absolutely deserve to be punished for this. We let this happen. If Dems could actually get a solid trifecta in the government, we might have a shot at actually reversing some of the damage that has been accumulating since Reagan, but that requires people to set aside their purity tests and hold their noses at the ballot box. The real elitists are the Democratic base who feel personally slighted at the idea of compromise or harm reduction.

[–] K1nsey6 1 points 21 hours ago

California has a bulletproof Democrat supermajority, They don't have any of the things that the DNC campaigned on. Why would I believe the DNC could get anything accomplished with a trifecta if a bulletproof Democrat super majority in California can't. Democrats are indebted to the same donor class, CEOs and bankers that Republicans are. They are merely controlled opposition to Republicans.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago (3 children)

There were 14 Presidents since FDR. And many of the Democratic ones had ample possibility to enact progressive laws and chose not to.

You keep claiming that people like Clinton, Obama, Clinton, Biden or Harris are "left", but they are center-right, in many aspects far right by European standards.

People don't vote "perfect" also not on the left. They vote "this is current issues, who addresses these issues?" Trump pretending to care about working class people helped him. Biden/Harris made a point of alienating everyone that is against genocide, which should be a nobrainer for progressive politics, and also peddling racist messages with bragging about their deportation numbers.

The idea that the center to far right Democrats would actually bring any leftist solution is laughable. They haven proven time and time again, that they are the party of maintaining the neoliberal and imperial status quo.

The solution is to offer a progressive solution against the reactionary solution, so people can rally around your progressive solution. Providing no solution and denying the problems is a surefire way to demotivate and disengage people. Someone who wants genocide, deportations and neoliberal economics can always vote the Republicans. And the Republicans can succesfully further the image of the Democrats being the billionaire cultural elite party, while the Reps are the billionaire "hard working" party, peddling the lie of the American dream. But it can be peddled to Joe and Jose in the milling plant.

[–] K1nsey6 2 points 21 hours ago

And all of the policies that FDR was credited for were actually drafted by Francis Perkins, his Secretary of Labor and Socialist.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] masquenox 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

This is the second time in a decade that the liberal establishment expected the US voting public to actually do something about all the fascism they themselves don't seem to actually want or can do anything about.

The "Vote Harder!" brigade was warned about this - at one point or the other, "lesser evilism" is going to hit rock-bottom.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Stop it Patrick, you’re scaring the liberals. Imagine how shocking it must be for reality to prove that the leftists were correct about everything this entire time. Again.

Really weird how leftists have a 100% accuracy rate about all of history going back 150 years, but I’m sure the liberals will take some Ws eventually.

Just keep barreling towards fascism, libs! I believe in you!

[–] UsernameHere 27 points 5 days ago (74 children)

“Voters voted for the choice furthest to the right because they wanted the choice on the left to be more left”

[–] [email protected] 46 points 5 days ago (8 children)

People didn't vote. Significantly less turnout this year than 2020. Further left is more exciting than an idiot chasing endorsement from Republicans.

It's stupid, but if people weren't stupid Trump wouldn't have been a candidate.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Less people voted Trump in 2024 than in 2020. It is not that Trump won, it is that Biden/Harris lost hard.

Trump: 74 Mio. in 2020, 73 Mio. in 2024

Biden/Harris: 81 Mio. in 2020, 69 Mio. in 2024

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_States_presidential_election

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_United_States_presidential_election

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (72 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›