robbo203
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
TS: “Your contempt for the anticolinial struggle reveals your true reactionary colors. If this group isn’t an MI6 psyop it bloody well should be”
On the contrary, your contempt for socialist opposition to such bourgeois constructs as so-called “national liberation movements” reveals just how thoroughly reactionary and conservative you truly are. All of these movements without exception have ended up fully embracing capitalism. Some of them ended up even worse than their erstwhile colonial masters (with whom many of them continued to do business) in their degree of corruption, and repression of the local workers and peasants.
For an antisocialist supporter of the disgusting imperialist capitalist regime of Putin, you have some nerve for criticizing others for not endorsing your cherished bourgeois notion of anti-colonial struggle when your very own beloved hero is at this very moment exemplifying his commitment to colonialism by annexing new territories with the intention of expanding “mother Russia”
I think the question of whether state capitalism was progressive vis a vis other variants of capitalism has to be in a temporal context: Are we talking about early capitalism or late capitalism? Also “progressive” with respect to what?
If we are talking about industrial output and the growth in GDP there is little doubt that state capitalism at least in the early stages of capitalist development was superior. Germany under Bismarck was arguably the first significant example of state capitalism in practice. By the end of the 19th century, it had decisively overtaken Britain in the industrial league table.
Similarly in the early decades of soviet state capitalism, GDP growth was remarkably high – though it started to peter off in the post-war era. The role of big American, and other, corporations in soviet industrialization in the Stalin era should not be overlooked, however.
The 1848 Communist Manifesto talked about the need to centralise capital and for the state to take over the means of production to hasten the development of the productive forces as rapidly as possible. Marx and Engels figured that this required the development of large-scale industry which in turn required the centralisation of capital. State ownership being the most centralised expression of capital ownership it seemed logical to them to call for the state ownership of capital as the means of accelerating capitalist development more rapidly than any other extant form of capitalism and so hasten the time when socialism might be materially possible
However, in the late 19th century and in light of the “great strides” already made in the development of modern capitalist industry, it seems they started to soft-peddle this particular notion of the “state capitalist road to socialism”. In the 1872 Preface to the Manifesto for example they seemed to distance themselves from, if not disown, much of the state capitalist reformist agenda set down in part 2 of the original manifesto
I think this provides us with a clue of sorts as to how to go about answering the question posed in this thread. State capitalism might have been progressive in the early days of capitalism but that is no longer the case.
Of course, we should be aware that there are not only different forms of capitalism but also different forms of state capitalism too. The current model of state capitalism in China is quite different from the so-called “command economy” of the Stalin era. At the recent Party Congress of the CPC Xi declared that it is the market, rather than a central plan, that will continue to play the “decisive role” in resource allocation.
In late capitalism which is much more economically diversified and complex than early capitalism, that is perhaps quite a predictable development
TS: ” I would include Mugabe and Gadaafi on my list of goodies. Mugabe was an anticolonial hero and instituted land reform, returning what was stolen by Euro colonists to indigenous Africans”
“According to some estimates, Robert Mugabe has about £1bn-worth of assets, much of it invested outside Zimbabwe. A 2001 US diplomatic cable, later released by the whistle-blowing organisation WikiLeaks, quoted this figure, and said that while reliable information was difficult to find, there were rumours that his assets “include everything from secret accounts in Switzerland, the Channel Islands and the Bahamas to castles in Scotland”.
Grace Mugabe is said to have bought a number of properties in the affluent Sandton suburb of Johannesburg and there are reported to have been property purchases in Malaysia, Singapore and possibly Dubai.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/17/robert-grace-mugabe-missing-millions-money-zimababwe
“The “fast track” land reform program in Zimbabwe has been accompanied by significant human rights abuses that harm the very people it was designed to assist, Human Rights Watch charged in a report released on the eve of Zimbabwe’s elections.
Militia groups affiliated with the party of President Robert Mugabe have carried out serious acts of violence against rural dwellers and landless workers on commercial farms, the report said. Human Rights Watch also received reports of discrimination in the distribution of land on political grounds.”
https://www.hrw.org/news/2002/03/08/zimbabwe-abuses-plague-land-reform
Robert Mugabe and his big buddy the slum landlord Nicholas van Hoogstraten – partners in profiteering
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/23/nicholas-van-hoogstraten-robert-mugabe-zimbabwe-coal
“The military rallies in Russia, China and North Korea look just as Scotsman describes. So they are Nazis too.”
Exactly Thomas. So to be consistent TS should be equally opposed to the “fascist-Nazi” regime of Putin otherwise he runs the risk being accused of being a Nazi sympathiser. It seems TS is one of those shallow and superficial commentators who seem to think the label on the bottle counts more than its contents. It is an intellectually lazy and dishonest way of proceeding. Just brand anyone who you dislike or disagree with as a Nazi so that the term nazi becomes more or less meaningless
“That’s nazis for you.”
The Ukrainian regime is an obnoxious authoritarian capitalist regime. But describing it as a nazi regime is unhelpful and inaccurate (despite the presence of a few Nazis there). It is just using the term “nazi” as a vague swearword.
By the same token, you might just as well call the obnoxious authoritarian capitalist regime in Russia a Nazi regime as well.
Or alternatively, “Why I no longer believe Jacob Rees-Mogg is a Marxist”
LOL
PGB, sure I can accept that there are some differences between various capitalist states – that some are more democratic in the bourgeois meaning of the term – although in the case of Ukraine and Russia there is precious little to choose between them. However even if Ukraine was a genuine democracy in this sense, I would still not be inclined to take sides in what is after all a fundamentally capitalist squabble. I do not endorse the lesser evil argument
“Yeah, Trump is/was a capitalist, Putin isn’t. Is your thinking so limited you cannot envisage a world leader who isn’t a businessman? The Forbes article is for credulous smooth brained chumps.”
___________________________________________________________________Nice attempt at evasion TS. I didn’t say Putin is a businessman in the sense of being involved in a business. I said he was a capitalist and a member of a tiny exploitative parasitic capitalist class. That has a somewhat different meaning not least because not all businessmen (particularly small businessmen) are capitalists. You don’t have to rely on just Forbes to confirm Putin’s staggering personal wealth. It is a universally acknowledged fact. Google it and confirm for yourself. Here in Spain he is a part owner of a massive villa complex somewhere in the Costa Del sol
__________________________________________________________________
“I’ve never once apologised for Russian capitalism. Money where mouth is. Quote me doing so.”
______________________________________________________________________Bollocks. You are very clearly a craven supporter of the imperialist ambitions of the Russian capitalist state vis a vis the Ukranian capitalist state. Virtually every single one of your contributions on this thread is evidence of this! You side with Russian capitalism against its commercial rivals
___________________________________________________________________
“Erm, he’s a capitalist and a communist? You sound a bit confused. Which is it?”
______________________________________________________________________Duh. Putin is about as much a “communist” as Trump, or Erdogan, or Orban or any other obnoxious right-wing capitalist politician. Where do you get such a dumb idea from that I somehow imagined Putin was a “communist”, eh?
_____________________________________________________________________
“Rubbish. Monetarily sovereign governments can literally print money into existence. Citizens need said money to pay their taxes. The government can employ all the now “unemployed” people and hey presto, the government is fully functioning. No capitalist enterprises necessary whatsoever. Read some modern monetary theory.”
______________________________________________________________________Perhaps with this fantasy economics that you seem to espouse you might care to explain why, in that case, do governments feel the need to levy taxes on businesses that, after all, provide them with the bulk of their revenue. From memory about 60-70 per cent of government revenue in the EU comes from taxation, the rest from government borrowing and other sources…
__________________________________________________________________
“In the Soviet Union for example state enterprises were required by law to generate profits or could be penalised if they did not.”
Entirely different to capitalist profits which are for the capitalist or paying out in dividends to investors. Do read more.
____________________________________________________________________Yes, there were differences between soviet state capitalism and western capitalism as far as the disposal of the economic surplus – surplus value – was concerned. This is not denied. The soviet capitalist class exercised collective de facto class ownership of the means of production via their stranglehold on the state machine rather than through de jure individual ownership as in the west. However, this difference is secondary and superficial. Profit is profit – the monetary form of surplus value signifying the exploitation of workers via the system of wage labour. It doesn’t matter whether profit is generated via a western corporation or a soviet state capitalist enterprise. It represents the same thing. You are confusing the thing itself with the different mechanisms for appropriating profit which are historically contingent
“Putin is a member of the capitalist class”
Erm no, he’s not. He’s a mere politician.
______________________________________________________-Duh. Is your thinking so limited that you cannot envisage a person can be both things at the same time TS? Trump was a capitalist – even you would not be so dumb as to deny this – yet he ended up as President of the US
_____________________________________________________________________
“And you believe a Forbes article because you’re a Socialist Poser Guardian Bro. You imbibe western propaganda like it’s mother’s milk. The result? You become a credulous, smooth-brained dupe. The truth of Putin’s wealth is nowhere near as interesting.”
__________________________________________________________________
Ad homs will get you nowhere TS. This only demonstrates the vacuity and weakness of your argument. And it is rich that an anti-socialist apologist for Russian capitalism like you should call me a socialist poser when you don’t even understand what is meant by socialism. But by all means, continue your bootlicking for your comrade Putin and pretending he is something other than an extraordinary wealthy and powerful member of an exploitative capitalist class if it makes you happy in your little bubble
___________________________________________________________
A so-called mixed economy IS a wholly capitalist economy – the mixture pertaining to a mixture of state and private CAPITAL.”Erm, wrong. Capitalism is all about profit. The state sector isn’t. Lol
________________________________________________________________LOL yourself TS. Your comments reveal your complete ignorance of Marxian economics. While it is true that part of the state sector does not in itself generate profit – it is unproductive in Marxian terms – it is nevertheless completely dependent on the profit-generating or productive sector of the capitalist economy for its financing. In the Soviet Union for example state enterprises were required by law to generate profits or could be penalised if they did not. A large chunk of these profits reverted to the central state via such mechanisms as turnover taxes – partly to finance the unproductive aspects of the Soviet state like its military machine. The point is that it was the profit-generating state enterprises that ultimately provided this source of finance. Over time an increasing proportion of the profits made by these state enterprises were allowed to be retained by them as the old state capitalist “command economy” model of running capitalism became increasingly unwieldy
“Putin is a politician not a businessman so already you sound like a frothing ignoramus. Is Russia wholly capitalist? No, it’s a mixed economy. More ignorance on display. Is he a scumbag? I don’t know what use the term is in a discussion such as this. He is human with qualities both good and bad like anyone else.”
____________________________________________________________
Putin is a member of the capitalist class, whether or not he directly engages in business dealings himself or has others do so on his behalf. By any standard, he is an extraordinary wealthy individual, According to some estimates his personal wealth is greater even than that of Musk’s
As for the claim that Russia not a wholly capitalist economy but a mixed economy, TS shows himself to be just as ignorant (and non-socialist) as the liberals he criticises. A so-called mixed economy IS a wholly capitalist economy – the mixture pertaining to a mixture of state and private CAPITAL. state capitalism is no less capitalist than private or free market capitalism. As Engels points that:
“The modern state, no matter what its form, is essentially a capitalist machine — the state of the capitalists, the ideal personification of the total national capital. The more it proceeds to the taking over of productive forces, the more does it actually become the national capitalist, the more citizens does it exploit. The workers remain wage-workers — proletarians. The capitalist relation is not done away with. It is, rather, brought to a head.! (Socialism Utopian and Scientific)
“Bijou calls the war between Ukraine and Russia a “gangster turf war”, likening it to the war between Al Capone and Bugs Moran, thus continuing the line of argument put here consistently by SP members: that there is no essential difference (no difference that matters) between Russia and Ukraine, thus wiping out any distinction between the invader and the invaded or between aggressor and the victim”
___________________________________________________________PGB, We are talking about the essential nature of these regimes. Both are corrupt, revolting, authoritarian, right-wing capitalist regimes administered in the interests of their respective oligarchies. No one even pretending to pay lip service to socialist ideas would touch other of these regimes with a bargepole, let alone legitimise the toxic nationalism that props both of them up
Quite simply, socialists don’t recognize or lend support to that preeminently capitalist institution – the nation-state. Differentiating and taking sides between capitalist states, defining one as the aggressor and the other as the victim is to unintentionally succumb to the ideological paradigm that upholds the nation-state as a preeminently capitalist institution and by extension capitalism itself
Even the most pacific and isolationist capitalist state is founded upon the aggression of class rule and its victims are the working class. We draw a veil over this every time we support one capitalist state against another in their belligerent commercial rivalries called war
“The world really is populated with goodies and baddies”
Does TS really believe that a scumbag sociopathic capitalist like Putin who heads a corrupt far-right authoritarian imperialist state like Russia is a “goody” worth supporting? True, there is not much to choose between this regime and the obnoxious Ukrainian regime but then the SPGB on principle does not support either side in this sordid capitalist squabble. TS does and in his craven support of the Russian capitalist state and its imperialist ambitions, he demonstrates just what an anti-socialist he truly is. True Scotsman = True nationalist = True apologist for capitalism!
An interesting slant on developments: “Putin and OPEC Join Forces to DESTROY the Liberal Globalist Order”. The basic thesis is that a new commodities-based world order with Putin and others at its head is coming into conflict with and threatening to bring down the current currency-based or financial world order controlled by a cabal of western states
Here’s the clip if you can access FB
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=616636793535088&extid=CL-UNK-UNK-UNK-IOS_GK0T-GK1C&ref=sharing
Relatedly there’s this link too:
One of the very few capitalist politicians one can regard with some respect. I’ve seen clips of her before. She stands head and shoulders above the warmongers on both sides, the apologists for the odious regimes of Putin or Zelinsky. A plague on both their houses! War is never in the interests of the working class
“I would posit that it is nowhere near the same. Ukraine on the other hand does share many similarities. I.e., all the Nazis.”
_________________________________________________________________TS There are full-blown Nazis around in Ukraine and in the regime. But it is absurd to say the regime itself is Nazi-run. That’s just stretching the term “Nazi” to the point of being meaningless. Ukraine is undoubtedly a corrupt authoritarian obnoxious regime but that is not the same thing as saying it is a nazi regime. Do you even understand what is meant by the term Nazi?
_____________________________________________________________________
““But while there are differences there are also very substantial commonalities- a point you seemingly willfully choose to ignore”And what would those be exactly? Do enlighten your audience.”
___________________________________________________________________I have already done so. Both regimes are obnoxious capitalist oligarchical regimes. Both are authoritarian and oppressive, Both are highly corrupt – amongst the worst in the world according to the transparency index. Need I go on?
_________________________________________________________________
“What you have failed to mention is that Ukraine is a proxy for the US and EU. The core of world imperialism. Arguably the greatest purveyors of violence and tyranny in all of world history.”
____________________________________________________________________Russia is an imperialist power too. Does that mean we must support one imperialist power against another? How does that amount to combating imperialism? Apart from which, imperialism is only an outgrowth of capitalism and capitalism is global. It is capitalism that is the problem and imperialism is just an invitable symptom of the problem. You have no interest in getting rid of capitalism (on the contrary you endorse various state capitalist regimes). By extension, your actions do nothing to combat imperialism but on the contrary help to support a support a system whose very dynamic is imperialist
____________________________________________________________
“I am neither a nationalist or pro-capitalist. And nor am I a fanatic. That is what you and the Socialist Posers Guardian Bros are. You see, you don’t live in the real world. You live in the world of fantasy and bad ideas. In the real world the imperialist core’s actions cause untold misery and grief to targeted nations whether capitalist, socialist or more likely, a mix of both. That is why I support Russia. It’s why I support Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran and China to name but a few of the nations targeted by the empire and its lackeys.”
___________________________________________________________________LOL TS you talking about living in the real world but you don’t even grasp the obvious fact that the kind of anti-socialist and pro-capitalist ideas you espouse give succour to the various obnoxious capitalist regimes you refer to. You don’t see this because you don’t understand what socialism is about – at all. Do you seriously imagine that the actions of an imperialist power like Russia does not also cause untold misery and grief to a targeted nation like Ukraine? Russia may not be the world’s most powerful imperialist power but that does make its military adventurism any the less repugnant. Or perhaps you dont see anything repugnant about Russian missiles killing civilians or Russian soldiers executing civilians. As for your jibe about the SPGB, to the contrary, I believe the SPGB (along with a few others) has taken the ONLY realistic position one can take in this whole sordid business by declaring that not a drop of working-class blood is worth shedding to perpetuate this senseless carnage
_____________________________________________________________
“And there we have it. This is the reason for your fanaticism. It makes you feel morally superior. You trash all existing and ever existing socialism. You are not socialists. You are the enemy of socialists. Your propaganda has not and never will make purchase in the working class. If they ever listened to your propaganda they’d be horrified by the idea of socialism as you present it and would become useless, feckless liberals. Which is what SPGB members actually are. Liberals.”
___________________________________________________________________Again LOL LOL LOL TS, You talk of “all-existing socialisms” thereby demonstrating that you understand nothing of socialism and indeed exhibit the same misunderstanding of socialism as the liberals you claim to oppose have in equating it with the various state capitalist regimes you support. Liberals by the way tend on the whole to support Ukraine in this war. The SPGB by contrast adamantly refuses to take sides in supporting one capitalist power against another. Get your facts straight
___________________________________________________________________
“I will never be ashamed of supporting a righteous victim of imperialist aggression.”
____________________________________________________________________Tell that to a Ukrainian family that has just witnessed its home being demolished by a missile launched by the imperialist forces of the Russian military
