Occupy London! Here we go again!

[PureAppleJuice]

lolbutRussiawasn'tCommunism. Anyone who knows anything about Marxism knows this. Excluding yourself.

The country is in a mess due to its transition to a market economy. You realise that the life expectancy and general quality of life in the Soviet Union (1988) was higher than any post-USSR period so far in the Russian Federation?

Probably not.

Stalinism was almost precisely Marxist. Marxists just frame Stalinism as some sort of 'Thermidor' or 'revolution betrayed'. Stalin followed Marxist 'class struggle' to the letter. Look at the way in which the Soviet regime targeted and identified 'enemies of the people'.

The Stalinist years were framed as exactly Marxist, a Manichean struggle between 'Communist and non-Communist'.

Are of you the opinion that Lenin was Marxist, and Stalin not, out of interest?

'The country is in a mess due to its transition to a market economy' - Which wouldn't of happened had it not been for the inglorious opportunists that were the Bolsheviks who didn't even command majority support. Self-styled the 'bolsheviks' to in fact give the impression that they had any support, at all. There is good economic/social evidence to suppose that had the provisional government not fallen in the February Revolution that Russia would have been on course for gradual economic change- though there is some debate that Russia's 'violent' cultural history could mean nothing but something as brutal as Stalin's regime.

'You realise that the life expectancy and general quality of life in the Soviet Union (1988)' - A period in which Western influences were changing Russia? To call it 'Soviet' by that point in time is riduclous anyway. I'm of the opinion that Soviet Russia slipped from Marxism in the 1950s, the General Secretaries from that point onwards were just clinging to revolution for revolution's sake.

 

[PureAppleJuice]

99% of the country is living on baked beans?

Tax rates have to come down?

Then she says mortgage rates must come down?! We have a base rate of 0.5%!!

Pretty much sums up my point earlier - these people have NO idea what they are moaning about. No idea at all. Infact the way she went on about company directors nice cars and nice houses hinted that perhaps this is simply jealousy?

Indeed, they're all [EDIT:]illinformed. They're all updating Twitter from their iPhones or Blackberrys no doubt. Trying getting the stereotypical homeless drunk involved in this protest, probably couldn't give a crap.

 

[[TW]Fox]

They just seem to want everything for nothing? There are so many mixes messages coming out of this from various people I dont see how anyone can argue it isn't just a bunch of moaners? There is no common aim, some of them want an end to tax, some want to pay less tax, some want to stop 'giving money to banks' even though nobody gave free money to banks, some of them want rich people to be poor or something, its all very odd.

And they've all got swanky mobile phones, internet access and 24/7 data connections. It must suck being so hard up? First world problems eh..

 

[D.P.]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15324901 - First thirty seconds of that video, you rage, you lose.

"Eight people have been arrested, of which six have been charged for offenses including affray and cannabis possession."

As I said earlier, a bunch of alternatives, hippies and students getting stoned and sticking their fingers up at normal honest working people.

 

[PureAppleJuice]

And they've all got swanky mobile phones, internet access and 24/7 data connections. It must suck being so hard up? First world problems eh..

It is exactly a case of that.

Actually guys, I can't afford that MacBook Air I wanted to type notes on, if the government hadn't bailed out the bank I could have one right now. I'm so sick of those fatcats.. getting fatter... out of my beans that I'm counting at home everyday using my calculator app for iPhone in my 2 up 2 down in Highgate.

 

[kwerk]

And who designed the tractor? Somebody who probably didnt get his hands dirty - a design engineer simply providing a service. Without this service, no tractor. Without the services of the management of the firm, no tractor...

But how many people are on the design team compared to how many miners, welders, assembly line workers, oil drillers, tyre makers, and the like?

It can only be a small fraction at best, not 50-60% of a large country.

 

[Castiel]

lolbutRussiawasn'tCommunism. Anyone who knows anything about Marxism knows this. Excluding yourself.

What it was is the Marxism-Leninist Ideal being applied in practice. It showed the flaws in any Communist state, that without authoritarianism and Oppression of the masses you cannot counter the inherent competitive nature of man and thus the socialist utopia that Marx envisaged is impractical and unobtainable and it's implementation leads to the opposite of what he allegedly intended.

Libertarian Marxism is simply an impractical political philosophy when applied to a real world environment.

 

[arknor]

You mean you aren't counting the baked beans on your kids plates? The extravegence.

"were all living on baked beans" lol baked beans arent cheap hese days love! thats your problem try and live off something else

 

[Floogie]

Stalinism was almost precisely Marxist. Marxists just frame Stalinism as some sort of 'Thermidor' or 'revolution betrayed'. Stalin followed Marxist 'class struggle' to the letter. Look at the way in which the Soviet regime targeted and identified 'enemies of the people'.

So that fact that Stalinism mirrored class struggle is the necessary qualifier for it to be Marxist? Enjoy picking that cherry? Marxist theory is far deeper than this and if you are well-read on the topic then you'd know. There is a distinction made between Marxism, Leninism and Stalinism for a reason. It's not one of immaterial worth.

Are of you the opinion that Lenin was Marxist, and Stalin not, out of interest?

Only if you think they were some sort of evolution of Marxism of course. Strictly they weren't. In a nutshell, Lenin removed the democratic checks and balances and modified Marx theory for his own ambition. Little difference with Stalin as he continued to preside over the largest state-capitalist enterprise that was the USSR...

'The country is in a mess due to its transition to a market economy' - Which wouldn't of happened had it not been for the inglorious opportunists that were the Bolsheviks who didn't even command majority support. Self-styled the 'bolsheviks' to in fact give the impression that they had any support, at all. There is good economic/social evidence to suppose that had the provisional government not fallen in the February Revolution that Russia would have been on course for gradual economic change- though there is some debate that Russia's 'violent' cultural history could mean nothing but something as brutal as Stalin's regime.

No point in debating a highly subjective 'what-if' scenario.

'You realise that the life expectancy and general quality of life in the Soviet Union (1988)' - A period in which Western influences were changing Russia? To call it 'Soviet' by that point in time is riduclous anyway. I'm of the opinion that Soviet Russia slipped from Marxism in the 1950s, the General Secretaries from that point onwards were just clinging to revolution for revolution's sake.

Go ahead and check the details for any period of Soviet history and you'll find it favourably compares up until early 1990. I'm sorry, but most historians seem to have formed a consensus that the transition from a command to market economy significantly damaged the life expectancy and quality of life for Russians in general. It's not contestable. Blaming it on the Soviet period is just reflective of your distaste for the politics. Always look objectively, not subjectively...

 

[Naffa]

Why are we debating Marxism? None of the protests in the various financial capitals of the world are advocating a Bolshevist revolution, nor anything of the sort, in their respective countries. Protesting against the inevitable exploitations, contradictions and crises of capitalism (something that I think everyone should be at least partly involved in), does not automatically lead to an advocacy of a particular alternative.

The biggest problem is that there isn't a viable alternative to the liberal democratic capitalist settlement at the moment, but that doesn't mean that its opponents are communists.

 

[Floogie]

What it was is the Marxism-Leninist Ideal being applied in practice. It showed the flaws in any Communist state, that without authoritarianism and Oppression of the masses you cannot counter the inherent competitive nature of man and thus the socialist utopia that Marx envisaged is impractical and unobtainable and it's implementation leads to the opposite of what he allegedly intended.

Marxist-Leninist. You said it. Not Marxist.

You are making the assumption that competition can only be borne out under capitalism and through the accumulation of money or material goods. Clearly not necessarily the case.

Libertarian Marxism is simply an impractical political philosophy when applied to a real world environment.

Libertarian socialist societies have existed and will possibly exist in the future. I think we are all aware, both Left and Right, that the concentration of power between the multi-nationals and the state is too great and it's in our best interest to debate, if not to promote, such options for the future.

 

[scorza]

Why are we debating Marxism? None of the protests in the various financial capitals of the world are advocating a Bolshevist revolution, nor anything of the sort, in their respective countries. Protesting against the inevitable exploitations, contradictions and crises of capitalism (something that I think everyone should be at least partly involved in), does not automatically lead to an advocacy of a particular alternative.

The biggest problem is that there isn't a viable alternative to the liberal democratic capitalist settlement at the moment, but that doesn't mean that its opponents are communists.

My thoughts exactly. IMO these protestors are more capitalist than the people supposedly defending capitalism in this thread. Everybody is supposed to benefit in a capitalist society, not just the 1%.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Everybody is supposed to benefit in a capitalist society, not just the 1%.

Which is what happens now. Most of us here are certainly benefitting from the capitalist society despite not being the 1%.

 

[Johnnytoxic]

It's embarrassing. The moaning greedy ****s who all want something for nothing.

As someone else pointed out, they've got shelter, mobile phones, internet, access to the NHS. Better than 90% of the world population.

Stick them all in an indian shanty town, see how much they whine then.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

My thoughts exactly. IMO these protestors are more capitalist than the people supposedly defending capitalism in this thread. Everybody is supposed to benefit in a capitalist society, not just the 1%.

Not just the 1% benefits - why can't you see that?

 

[Slam62]

99% of the country is living on baked beans?

Tax rates have to come down?

Then she says mortgage rates must come down?! We have a base rate of 0.5%!!

Pretty much sums up my point earlier - these people have NO idea what they are moaning about. No idea at all. Infact the way she went on about company directors nice cars and nice houses hinted that perhaps this is simply jealousy?

nobody is paying 0.5% on their mortgage

 

[PureAppleJuice]

Go ahead and check the details for any period of Soviet history and you'll find it favourably compares up until early 1990. I'm sorry, but most historians seem to have formed a consensus that the transition from a command to market economy significantly damaged the life expectancy and quality of life for Russians in general. It's not contestable. Blaming it on the Soviet period is just reflective of your distaste for the politics. Always look objectively, not subjectively...

With all due respect I have studied the Soviet Union and Marxism in depth for several years. My dissertation itself was primarily on how Stalinism was inherently Marxist. And, as any Historian can tell you, History is almost always written subjectively.

In fact, you're right, the standard of living was somewhat better in the Soviet years, but at what cost? I guess you've got to break a few eggs to make an omelette.

And the Marxist democractic checks that you mention are inherently flawed for several reasons, the key one being human nature. I don't doubt that Marx was a great man and massively influential but in principal it doesn't work without authoritarianism.

Edit: In fact, I am playing down some of Soviet Russia's dues- but I refer to my second point, at what cost? Nazi Germany had similar impressive economic improvements (okay, debateable), yet to state such a thing is detestable, it should be so with Soviet Russia. The systematic murder was as bad, if not worse, than Nazi Germany.

 

[Hatter The Mad]

nobody is paying 0.5% on their mortgage

So what?

 

[PureAppleJuice]

My thoughts exactly. IMO these protestors are more capitalist than the people supposedly defending capitalism in this thread. Everybody is supposed to benefit in a capitalist society, not just the 1%.

I wouldn't really say that capitalism is there to benefit 'everyone', there's always going to be some losers.

The reason we're debating Marxism is that, if you listen to some of these protestors they're spouting Bolshevik crap.

It isn't just the '1%' who are reaping the rewards. I don't know where this idea has come from.

 

[Jokester]

nobody is paying 0.5% on their mortgage

A lot of people weren't even paying interest full stop at one point because of their tracker mortgages.