Message from @Xinyue

Discord ID: 522060699292401701


2018-12-11 14:20:23 UTC  

but is this possible? i think that it will be very difficult to stop capitalism from expanding because to stop it from expanding means to stifle its growth rate. if you stifle the growth of capitalism - and capitalism is a system *fundamentally predicated upon ad infinitum growth* - the system comes apart

2018-12-11 14:20:25 UTC  

not capitalists

2018-12-11 14:20:48 UTC  

limit the growth

2018-12-11 14:21:09 UTC  

seems like a brainlet solution

2018-12-11 14:21:15 UTC  

I mean tbh I'd see Juche work better for nationalists than capitalism but idk

2018-12-11 14:21:26 UTC  

expansion seems like a good solution tho

2018-12-11 14:22:02 UTC  

you mean expand the purview of the nation, the state, so that capitalism would have more domestic living space? that would imply war, if you mean expansion in the state sense

2018-12-11 14:23:09 UTC  

any of the two is alright

2018-12-11 14:29:06 UTC  

I believe that the alt-right has a "marketist" perspective

2018-12-11 14:29:25 UTC  

In that rabid consumerism is bad and community is important

2018-12-11 14:30:13 UTC  

But believe market forces are the best way to determine production

2018-12-11 14:30:36 UTC  

And that the individual has a right to make money

2018-12-11 14:35:34 UTC  

markets are actually consistent with socialism, there's a whole school of thought on this - market socialism. but capitalism isn't. and yes, capitalism and markets aren't the same thing

2018-12-11 14:36:34 UTC  

Titoist Yugoslavia is the prime example of worker-coop based MarSoc - no capitalism there, workers run the economy, the economy is democratic and social ownership rules the land. Not a single privately owned business - all horizontal, democratic worker-coops.

2018-12-11 14:36:50 UTC  

Yet, markets still existed

2018-12-11 14:37:53 UTC  

I thought you were saying markets aren't consistent with capitalism

2018-12-11 14:39:28 UTC  

markets are consistent with socialism and capitalism, ultimately. you can have markets in both a framework of social ownership (say, a market economy founded solely on worker-coops and their industrial federations under the purview of the socialist republic) *or* in the context of private ownership of the means of production, that is private companies under the purview of the state

2018-12-11 14:40:17 UTC  

for any nationalist worth their salt, if you had to choose one society with markets in them, the MarSoc is obviously better for the interests and purposes of the nation than the capitalist alternative

2018-12-11 14:41:11 UTC  

Yes I know

2018-12-11 14:41:31 UTC  

I studied Yugoslavia extensively when I was a commie scumfuck

2018-12-11 14:42:50 UTC  

then you know of the awe of Yugomarxist socialism and the purity of their praxis! 😁 time to come back to it m8, we'll take you back promise 🤞

2018-12-11 14:43:17 UTC  

tbh Tito made lots of mistakes along the way, wtf was that guy doing with IMF

2018-12-11 14:43:47 UTC  

used to be a Titoist myself some time ago. for a couple of years. but ultimately I became convinced of the Soviet position, the Khrushchevite one to be exact

2018-12-11 14:45:46 UTC  

yugo economy was unsustainable, it was getting into debt to be lifted out of debt. the jew interest rate was never going to allow something like that to exist

2018-12-11 14:47:01 UTC  

and tito was a butcher but that's besides the point.

2018-12-11 14:47:33 UTC  

it was, ultimately, unsustainable for the ambition that it had. It should've taken a more gradual plan to develop the economy, and I'd say that there was too little direct state planning involved. I appreciate the entirely worker-centric economy that they had, in some sense a *very pure form of socialism* rarely seen in other examples (and I still love SFRY to death to be honest, glory to Tito) but the way they went about it - the tactics - were very off and ultimately doomed the country to the grim fate it experienced (although the Serbian powergrab ops towards the end of 1980s were a major factor as well)

2018-12-11 14:48:07 UTC  

>serb power grab

2018-12-11 14:48:19 UTC  

tito was explicitly anti-serb

2018-12-11 14:48:36 UTC  

when observing through national lense, the serb got fucked in yugoslavia

2018-12-11 14:49:14 UTC  

he started importing albanians ultimately to replace the serbs

2018-12-11 14:49:33 UTC  

> Tito was a butcher

.....mmkay. In the late 1940s, I'd say that's an apt characterisation. Yugoslavia did undergo a brief Stalinist phase, this is oft ignored by yugo enthusiast and lots of mistakes were made in that period. To be sure, you had fascist insurgencies that needed to be quelled but nothing really justifies the estimated 150K death figure. Imo. Then again, considering what the Independent State of Croatia - the fascist lackeys of the third reich - did during WW2 (killing 660K civilians), it might have been unavoidable.

2018-12-11 14:50:10 UTC  

dude, the full extent of the tito crime hasn't even been uncovered

2018-12-11 14:50:25 UTC  

just like russia, serbia keeps it locked behind a key

2018-12-11 14:51:12 UTC  

unmarked graves etc. its why the post balkanazation was such a mess, because they started uncovering the graves tito made

2018-12-11 14:51:25 UTC  

The full extent of 20th century crimes in general will never be known. 19th and 20th centuries were *fucked,* man. Absolutely fucked. There may be entire millions of people dead from both centuries who'll never be accounted for. So while that might be true, its not necessary *uncommon* for the century in question.

2018-12-11 14:51:31 UTC  

they tried to pin that on serbs too

2018-12-11 14:51:49 UTC  

yeah that's true

2018-12-11 14:51:53 UTC  

anyway got to go

2018-12-11 14:52:00 UTC  

talk later

2018-12-11 14:52:03 UTC  

yeah sure ttyl

2018-12-11 15:01:55 UTC  

@Xinyue ```the only non-capitalist movements are socialist ones, because socialists are the only people who reject private ownership of means of production. therefore yours is not in any way a movement skeptical of capitalism, merely a more mixed form of it```


I would go with Socialism if it worked better, I'm not ideological when it comes to Economics, Capitalism isn't a high value where I derive all my other Politics from...