deathtoreddit

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5504533

I'm confused

So far, I've heard that accumulation, technological advancement, and thus concentration of capital from the previous capitalist economy would leave its print on the later modern socialist economies

But other than that, I've realized I've never looked much into what distinguishes AES's economic management, mainly of state-owned enterprises, from capitalist economy's management, in concrete policy

I can understand co-operatives, but such orgs don't necessarily make up socialism, as you guys would say

to Libs

If you gimme a deeply unserious answer, I will fuck your father

---

I'm confused

So far, I've heard that accumulation, technological advancement, and thus concentration of capital from the previous capitalist economy would leave its print on the later modern socialist economies

But other than that, I've realized I've never looked much into what distinguishes AES's economic management, mainly of state-owned enterprises, from capitalist economy's management, in concrete policy

I can understand co-operatives, but such orgs don't necessarily make up socialism, as you guys would say

The same with Mao, in terms of balancing good and bad policies, of their OWN time.

How does even mess up "Republique de Coree" for "Republique Populaire Democratique de Coree"

Anyways, enjoy the recognition, boys!

cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5107328

Unless something more material like a whole continent turning anti-imperialist, if not socialist, and deciding collectively to nationalize the fruit and veg produce, and thus disrupts U.S's produce imports -

I don't think any internal problems in America would reach to a boiling point, as to end on a conclusive note

So what if it's a big deal to you, huh, America is the most armed-country, and has a lot of guns, yet no internal civil war(s), like we've seen in the 20th century like Argentina's Dirty War or China's, has occurred recently... it's just reactionary settler business as usual

Im America, nichts neues

Unless something more material like a whole continent turning anti-imperialist, if not socialist, and deciding collectively to nationalize the fruit and veg produce, and thus disrupts U.S's produce imports -

I don't think any internal problems in America would reach to a boiling point, as to end on a conclusive note

So what if it's a big deal to you, huh, America is the most armed-country, and has a lot of guns, yet no civil war(s) has occurred recently... it's just reactionary settler business as usual

Im America, nichts neues

Ye see, I've been reading a book called "Cambodia 1975-1982" by Michael Vickery (you can find its pdf), and needless to say, its goal is to:

prove{s} that the truth {of 'Democratic Kampuchea'} was much more complex than the situation as portrayed by anti-Communist Western media, by pro-revolutionary sympathizers, or by the regime itself, and would dishearten all three of those groups.

Specifically, D.K Cambodia was split between 2 main power-holding sections, East Zone and Northwest (Viet-allied and gradualist) and Southwest (Anti-Viet, chauvinist), and the Southwest one led by Pol Pot won and purged the rest...

1975-1977 wasn't that bad (more or less attempted economic recovery), but 1977-1979 was Pol Pot's purge time we all know and hate...

Besides that, it talks of People's Republic of Kampuchea from 1979-1982...

I reached this section over here:

Children's work in the old days though was accompanied by much fun and play, as the elephant dung story clearly indicates; and the suppression of fun and play is one of the things which distinguished DK invidiously from pre-revolutionary Cambodia.

Among the comments accompanying the children's drawings was the account of a boy who had worked minding water buffalo, a typical children's chore in Cambodia. He told of being punished twice in one day, once for allowing the animal to run away, also typical, but once for laughing and joking while at work, which for Cambodia was entirely aberrant.

Thoughts on this book, or just on D.K Cambodia?

As an easter egg: if you recognize which user I am in hexbear, then ye know...

cross-posted from: https://hexbear.net/post/2858492

I think I understand the simple model of base and superstructure (but that was Gramsci's model)

The simple use of quantitative to qualitative change, and vice versa

The simple fact that contradictions can exist in a society, manifesting in the form of problems, which are symptoms of its economic systems...

I don't think its about thesis + anti-thesis -> synthesis.

I think its about one economic class, like capitalist to feudal lord, dominating over one class, and absorbing its birthmark attributes, before surpassing its birthmarks overall...

Or as if a capitalist upon its created proletariat, not only ruling over them, but co-opting or destroying any of its measures

To me, its about who the ruling most HEGEMONIC class is, and how it operates...

Other than that, I don't know how else to apply it, let alone know if its somewhat broadly accurate....

Correct me if I'm wrong, if not elaborate on what ye mean?

If you know, you know

Apparently, even if I put in English settings for my post, my post is not allowed...

Here's what I wanted to post:

https://web.archive.org/web/20231124232348/https://rebolusyongpangkultura.blogspot.com/2016/03/mga-kanta-ng-rebolusyong-pilipino.html#rebo36

Example: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/4856206 (Pamphletz not only reveals himself to be patsoc but believes Marxism is Catholic)

Jaysus wept... can they not spill their beans?