The idea to build a movement around 'socialism' in the US is bad even when you believe that almost everyone is still a boomer. Given that it's mostly associated with the countries that dissolved after they lost the cold war, it's a cursed meme
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
I disagree. He helped me read more about socialist theory. I went from Marx to Kropotkin and now I'm a libertarian Socialist. Additionally, many young voters now approve of socialism, according to many polls.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NickRhymesWitMc
Yes, it is the privilege and beauty of youth to be wrong with passion, hubris and recklessness. But please also talk to people that actually lived in socialism and understand that real world people will not act on your ideals, but on what they consider to be their true incentives
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @NickRhymesWitMc
Sanders is probably not a Stalinist or Maoist, but prefers some Scandinavian model, but Scandinavia is social democratic capitalism, something that Marx did not consider possible.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
I disagree. Social democracy derived from Marxism. Additionally, Marx and Engels thought a worker controlled Democratic State was paramount in the transition to communism. However, it wouldn't be the end goal.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NickRhymesWitMc
All European social democratic traditions eventually bought into the notion that the working class *should* be working in the factories of the bourgeoisie, but to favorable conditions. The communist traditions preferred the rule of the working class, which did not work out well.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
I think this is where they erred. They just excepted less exploitation. Additionally, many of their rights were given only because of the bloody class revolutions of European past. The same holds true for American worker rights.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @NickRhymesWitMc
Note that Marx and Engels were not members of the working class, but of the bourgeoisie. They had a vision of changing the cultural identity of the working class into theirs. However, the working class in socialist countries did not become the carrier class of culture.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Plinz @NickRhymesWitMc
Society is more than the antagonistic struggle of classes against each other, just like an organism is not the result of the antagonistic struggle of its organs. Good living conditions for all citizens are in the best interest of all groups of citizens.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Society can be so much more and should be. However, until the underlying class hierarchical struggles are destroyed, society cannot be anything more. If we are to believe what they research suggests here (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn22071-inequality-why-egalitarian-societies-died-out/ …), I find my statement to be true
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
the evidence is poor; a historical model that can explain the past but fails to predict the future is overfitting
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
I think this model does well to ignore much noise and provide reliable future observations
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.