#441
lol the book is a defense of stalin to a great extent. we have come full trot now i think when we accuse a book like that of trotskyism
#442
my collapse of the ussr thread is some background info from Is The Red Flag Flying and a summary of that book, freakin read it
#443
Theyyre all right. Its a great book. Socialism betrayed. Betrayed by perestroika apparatchiks
#444
writing my own book atm.... teh rhizzone betrayed... babayfinland figures predominantly
#445

babyfinland posted:
lol the book is a defense of stalin to a great extent. we have come full trot now i think when we accuse a book like that of trotskyism



i was just forming an opinion based entirely on the title lol

#446

deadken posted:

babyfinland posted:
lol the book is a defense of stalin to a great extent. we have come full trot now i think when we accuse a book like that of trotskyism

i was just forming an opinion based entirely on the title lol

its about the collapse of the soviet union lol. our weird trotskyite obsession is beginning to burrow into our skulls and getting all up in it, and diggin around

#447
no matter how obsessed w/ trotskyism rhizzone is, trotskyites will always be more obsessed with stalin

#448

aerdil posted:
writing my own book atm.... teh rhizzone betrayed... babayfinland figures predominantly



i will not abide rape scenes

#449
both authors are members of the CPUSA and it is published by the CPUSA's old publishing house International Publishers and it was praised in the CPUSA and related papers and such so yeah

it is probably a good book but like Warning: They are members of the Obama Party
#450
ehhh in the history of communism as Eternal Idea trotskyism is a p insignificant deviation, antirevisionists are right a lot of the time but theyre worrying about all the wrong shit
#451
actually apparently keeran is ornery about the whole obama thing:

http://willamettereds.blogspot.com/2010/03/cpusa-national-board-criticizes-authors.html
#452
i literally cant think of a single good book without rape scenes
#453

deadken posted:
ehhh in the history of communism as Eternal Idea trotskyism is a p insignificant deviation, antirevisionists are right a lot of the time but theyre worrying about all the wrong shit



" . . . "

#454
thanks for digging that up getfiscal, this part was funny

2. The letter ignores the context of our attendance, namely that the Canadian Communist Party, like other Communist Parties, invited us to speak on our book. The letter does not give the title of the book, SOCIALISM BETRAYED: BEHIND THE COLLAPSE OF THE SOVIET UNION, nor does it mention that International Publishers(IP)published the book in 2004 after the NB voted in favor of its publication over the objections of Sam Webb.



#455
well.. i'm a Communist. i believe in class struggle, the inherent exploitation of capitalism, and the fallacious nature of bourgeois democracy. *votes barack obama for president of the united states of america*
_________________________________________________________________/

Edited by aerdil ()

#456
the cpusa line is that the ussr was basically socialist until its collapse, which is why i assumed the authors were in that vein. i guess the authors are critical of the post-stalin reforms while thinking the country was still "red" overall, while maoists and hoxhaists think that khrushchev's reforms and new line were so fundamentally different that they restored capitalism.
#457
the cpusa still views china as socialist so its safe to say there's quite a lot of leeway with how they use that term...

Saffer said that, although shed been to China before for a UN conference, this was the fist time she had ever had the chance to experience China. While much of the U.S. news media portrays China as a land of freewheeling capitalism and exploitation, Saffer said she was impressed by the countrys socialist construction.

You have to get out of the mindset that socialism looks a certain way, and that we know what it looks like, she said. In China, laws are made to support working people.



The CPC believes that China is in the primary stages of building socialism. When the Communist Party won state power in 1949, China had been ravaged by civil war and invasion. The early years after 1949 were marked both by periods of substantial economic and social progress, and by costly mistakes. During the “cultural revolution,” from 1966-1976, continuous political upheavals dealt a grievous setback to economic and social development.

The policies of reform and opening to the outside world that underlie China’s development today began in 1978, with the renewed leadership role of Deng Xiaoping. In practice, this means a thorough restructuring of the state owned sector aimed at bringing these industries up to world standards, and a planned opening of the economy to domestic and foreign private investment.



i fucking hate the CPUSA, waht a shell of its former self.. as far as i can tell its just filled with useful idiots and fbi informants atm

Edited by aerdil ()

#458
to be fair, a good number of leftists consider venezuela "socialist" in some sense, and china probably has a better claim on it than venezuela

china: large national planning organs, large state sector, mostly public ownership of the banking sector, state inspection and regulation of corporate sector, public ownership of land, ruling party officially committed to marxism and socialism, etc.
#459
if thats ur definition of socialism then its indecipherable from state capitalism
#460
i don't consider china socialist. i lived there for a bit a few years ago and it is pretty thoroughly capitalist.
#461

deadken posted:
ehhh in the history of communism as Eternal Idea trotskyism is a p insignificant deviation, antirevisionists are right a lot of the time but theyre worrying about all the wrong shit



Lin Biao:

in the end, the essence of revisionism is the fear of death



sounds like they're worrying about the right shit to me

#462

getfiscal posted:
actually apparently keeran is ornery about the whole obama thing:

http://willamettereds.blogspot.com/2010/03/cpusa-national-board-criticizes-authors.html


lol

#463
[account deactivated]
#464
[account deactivated]
#465
[account deactivated]
#466
[account deactivated]
#467
[account deactivated]
#468
[account deactivated]
#469
lol
#470
[account deactivated]
#471
is that the book ur reading? that isnt postmodernism thats just dumb.
#472
.
#473

discipline posted:
If I offered you ten million dollars under the condition that you live as the other sex for the rest of your life, would you take me up on the offer?

Let's face it: if cissexuals didn't have subconscious sex, then sex reassignment would be far more common than it is. Women who wanted to succeed in the male-dominated business world would simply transition to male. Lesbians and gay men who were ashamed of their queerness would simply transition to the other sex. Gender studies grad students would transition for a few years to gather data for their theses. Actors playing transsexuals would go on hormones for a few months in order to make their portrayals more authentic. Criminals and spies would physically transition as a way of going undercover. And contestants on reality shows would be willing to change their sex in the hope of achieving fifteen minutes of fame.



is this seriously considered a feminist masterpiece because its absurd fairyland nonsense

#474
if i could, i think i'd try out being a woman for a couple of days, but mostly for clitoral orgasms which i gather transwomen can't get
#475
the orgasms that women have make me jealous. an old sentiment by now, but one that is re-confirmed every time
#476
the male orgasm sucks frankly, pump pump squirt squelch endorphins done. kinda makes u wonder how come the sexual economy was something constructed by men rather than women
#477
[account deactivated]
#478
is that from the same book
#479
[account deactivated]
#480
gender essentialism... feminist as Fuck