• алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    shield
    M
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    For those who don’t seem to get it:
    No, this meme does not mean that you can’t temporarily halt fascist electoral victory, but rather that fighting symptoms and portraying that as a “victory over fascism” completely disregard the root cause (as liberalism often does)…

    Tho I’m ngl, the NFP seems to be pretty based, at least relative to the usual neolib bs

    ie.: Fascism is a built-in function of capitalism and thus bourgeois “democracy”. Capitalism turns to fascism when threatened, so as long as you aren’t ready to give up the private ownership of the economy, you will not be able to get rid of fascism (paraphrasing Bertolt Brecht here)

    sheesh, I often forget, that libs and revisionists actually believe in bourgeois democracy. If you are open to changing your mind I can recommend “Reform or Revolution” by Rosa Luxenburg

    EDIT: @[email protected] made me aware of an ebook-specific link

    • Veraxus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      4 months ago

      I had to read that a couple of times before I understood what you are trying to say. At first glance, it seemed like you were calling democracy itself bourgeois, but I think you meant it as a specific thing that isn’t actual democracy… e.g. it’s an illusion of democracy because capitalism gives the wealthy the ability to steer the whole ship, as it were. Please correct me if my understanding is wrong.

      • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I’m glad you took the time to read and understand it in good faith!

        And yes, under bourgeois “democracy” (be it multiparty or bi/mono party dominant) you only get to choose between various representatives of capital

        The system and it’s laws are inherently designed in such a way, that no matter whom you elect, you still live under the dictatorship of capital

      • uis@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        It seems so. Capitalism fundamentally unequal, which is opposite of real democracy.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve learned that using the term “bourgeois” just confuses half of liberals and convinces the other half that you must be a tankie - I just call it liberal democracy and they get it (it does send them into reactionary fits, though).

      • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        That just exposes them as being politically illiterate reactionaries and staunch defenders of capital

        Those who are open-minded will interact in good faith and ask for clarification (the thread of my overarching comment might be an example)

      • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        1st of all there is no such thing as a communist country, as communism describes a state-, money- and classless society.

        Then I think you are conflating two very different things: what I think you are alluring to, simply describes a more centralised and ruthless approach at achieving and keeping alive a revolution. (and arguably betraying it, but that does not constitute fascism)

        Fascism is a very different thing. Basically it’s the act of “unifying” a group of people or nation against a caricature of a “common enemy”. It seeks the suppression of proletarian class struggle by forcing collaboration and integrating society into one “corpus”. Corporatism is a core tenant of fascism, which is (imo) very well depicted through unions being forced to merge with (or be disbanded into) private companies, because “such distinctions are obsolete when we stand united as one Volk”. Those class distinctions never disappear, but the whole charade is basically based on that premise.

        Ofc this all serves the protection of capital by fooling the working masses and suppressing labour or simply “undesirable” elements of society…

        • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Communism involves, almost by definition, a centrally planned economy. That isn’t really possible without a state.

          • алсааас [she/they]@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Socialism can involve that (decentralised planning is possible)

            In communism - as there is no need for the suppression of reactionary classes anymore - the socialist state ceases to exist in terms of what we know as a “state”

            Administration of the economy can and will still exist in the post-“socialist world republic” (ie. communist) world

            • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              A Leninist would tell you that the “state” is defined by class suppression

              A Leninist should perhaps open a dictionary instead of trying to redefine words.

              small groups that own and control their own means of production are capable of spontaneously organizing at a mass scale

              An Anarchist has clearly never worked in any group setting I’m familiar with.