Message from @The Big Oof
Discord ID: 522666447848341519
@Nikitis in historical perspective, that understands that conditions aren't products of superstructure but the base structure, and which understands that the base structure is never stagnant or that it never emanates from ideas but instead material and technical conditions, we would conclude that the question is immaterial. What the living conditions were over 30 years ago is not relevant to the stage of development in 2018.
I read that a sense of privacy didn't exist in the USSR is that true?
And living conditions were consistently rising in USSR, population was growing and the education levels were rising, etc. It was going pretty well until the era of stagnation triggered by Brezhnev's failure and then later driven to ground by Gorbachev
Why did Brezhnev fail?
Every revolutionary movement has been leading up to the final revolution, which is for you to *die*
The final revolution is technocracy and transhumanism
Revolutionary movements are environmentalistpilled
And the elites killing all of us Proles
He and the clique he represented - the Kosygin gang etc. - were ultimately bureaucratists and the stagnation stemmed from both the excessive bureaucratism and also from the fact that Kosygin introduced profit rationale to the way Soviet Union functioned. This, of course, was bad for a socialist economy that isn't meant to operate on profit logic. Socialised profit or not, its ultimately disadvantageous for socialism to adopt this.
```> Fascism is the dictatorship of the collective
Fundamentally untrue. Fascism is the dictatorship of the state and the highest tiers of the state leadership to be exact; Fascism, due to its repudiation of democracy as being unconducive to the Fascist spirit, cannot be collective dictatorship because the collective would only be able to execute a collective will as emergent through democratic institutions. Communism can be considered to be dictatorship of the collective, but not Fascism..```
A Leader/Monarch/Premier is in essence supposed to represent the collective will of the Nation, and guide the society to above all else, it's Preservation. Now that is the Ideal.
If they mess things up, all the problems they create are theres to deal with, they can't just shed responsibility after 8 years and leave.. they will have their head at the end of a stick and they are very aware of that..
It isn't ofc a utopia, there are complications with this model too.. @Xinyue
Yes but that's not a very viable "collective dictatorship". That is private dictatorship of the state leadership, in abstract argued to be collective. But not in actual fact nor in the effect.
Fascism is also gay
^
very gay
Agree
Fresh = Marxist Sage confirmed
It’s just as revolutionary as communism
....literally is reactionary by definition tho
Fresh = demoted confirmed
It’s literally a revolutionary movement
"History does not travel backwards"
literally is not a revolutionary movement
-Mussolini
Fascism isn't Reactionary at all
It is a Modernist ideology
It is revolutionary perhaps in the sense that it posits itself *in opposition of capitalism,* but ultimately in an effort to realise some bygone guild system in a reconstituted form.
Perhaps you see it that way, however, fascism itself does not see itself as reactionary @Xinyue
Especially not Mussolini
Oh fuck oh fuck holy shit oh fuck oh fuck this is bad holy fuck
It’s part of the same erroneous western trend of attempting to immenentize the eschaton
I know, its a label imposed by Marxists
but I'm a Marxist so
can't help it
😁
At least in what I read in the doctrine of fascism
And solve man’s problems politically
there's literally nothing wrong with reactionary politics
There is NO political solution to man’s problems
We should take the Marxists and put them on a boat and float them into the Pacific until they starve to death and then recycle the boat into dildos to own the libs