If U/ACC means "the course of history is largely outside of human agency" then I'm U/ACC. But it seems to mean "the victory of free market libertarianism is inevitable" which is straight bunkum.
This is exactly right... In exactly the wrong direction, which is to say exactly wrong.
-
-
Command economies gonna win. I’m not looking at this is a humanist way. It’s simply the best way to construct infrastructure and heavy industry growth.
-
NAP exists in complete opposition to deteritorialization, granting sovereignty to property as opposed to crushing it
-
Nobody round these parts advocates the NAP or humanist politics, but mashing together deterritorialization and command economies is resolutely ludicrous (as is the idea of command economies "winning" - itself an all-too-human notion)
-
Dominance is significant, and organization can take on schizophrenic and non linear forms. Winning is more a concept based on actualization of a form of economy through force.
-
Cybersyn would be a form of command economy for example, but would b v deteritorialized. Necessity of command economy is simply because of limitations of capital as system, a relative territorialization based on the transformation of all resources into commons
-
Not sure what this has to do with u/acc at all, as exploration of an opposite set of conclusions (the inability to withstand the battery of capital's ability to route-around the political and rot it from the inside-out), or w/ deter. in a D&Gian sense of the word.
-
That’s why you gotta look to North Korea and Cuba, with policies such as
#Taean and shit. Brezhnev and Khrushchev are long dead but Kim and Castro live. -
The inability to withstand siege is the greatest weakness of the old ML gang, but growth was there greatest strength and incorporating their successes is necessary
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.