methlabretriever posted:i guess my definition would be something along the lines of the TNCC is above national and comprador bourgeoisie because they can extend their reach and influence beyond national boundaries. they are the highest form of bourgeoisie, if you will
every capitalist can reach beyond national borders, what do you think the triangle trade was
Edited by Urbandale ()
Edited by RedMaistre ()
methlabretriever posted:untrue. national and comprador bourgeoisie are constrained by national borders
Being based within national boundaries is not the same as being unable to act outside of them.
Otherwise, under this definition of "transnational", the British Raj coudn't have be British because it existed outside of the UK.
Edited by RedMaistre ()
methlabretriever posted:untrue. national and comprador bourgeoisie are constrained by national borders
oh man wait til crow sees this
Urbandale posted:its incumbent on the education department to force them
catchphrase
Urbandale posted:
maybe the RSU could hold a fundraiser to buy a microphone
methlabretriever posted:The West however seems to have begun to change their stance wrt to ISIS and has begun to damage/destroy their oil infrastructure
you mean... syria's infrastructure?
"I hole-hardedly agree, but allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where false morals are a diamond dozen, true virtues are a blessing in the skies. We often put our false morality on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite. So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are saying it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your argument you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality. I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go. Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the facts. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with flying carpets like it’s a peach of cake."
Because that's my writing style to a T.
cars posted:methlabretriever posted:The West however seems to have begun to change their stance wrt to ISIS and has begun to damage/destroy their oil infrastructure
you mean... syria's infrastructure?
Syria's got a... infrastructer??? Baha. haha. That stinky place has been invaded by every evil empire of the history of the earth. Bombed, naded to cinders. Those backward ass tribal hill people havent seen a day without heartbreak since the big ass bang. Look at any picture of the region, civilization, what civilzation? Lol, what fuck is a "Syria" anyway
and if you have a hard time believing the line, you begin to start asking: well if these insurgent guys were fighting a war against the Syrian government back then... while also fighting al-Qaeda for us... right next to weaklings who were doing a very bad job of the exact same tasks but were likely receiving Western weapons, money and intelligence support at the least... is the office of president of the U.S., which can fight wars by itself by signing secret papers at midnight, known for keeping its hands tied in that sort of situation? out of sheer Free Syrian principle? how about its intelligence services? the DoD? State? do these guys seem like the people to pick Charlie Brown's crappy Christmas tree and sing lu lu lu while some foreign leader they don't like still breathes? the Bush administration didn't have to orchestrate 9/11. all it had to do was orchestrate a half-hearted fraud over supposed nuclear weapons in another place where the Western press mostly wasn't allowed, and that was back when the Western press was still paying attention.
methlabretriever posted:Crow posted:methlabretriever posted:i think that's their goal, right? The West however seems to have begun to change their stance wrt to ISIS and has begun to damage/destroy their oil infrastructure.
i know, that's an old article. they just started bombing isis` oil infrastructure recently
True, it *is* an old article, from the same day you posted this post, which was yesterday. Old!
The national and comprador bourgeoisie have been sealed in their borders by the unspeakable might of the Trans National Capitalist Class.. But even the Nationless, Nameless Ones know they will someday break out of their crystal prisons... Will they make foreign investments left and right?... Will they be backed by savage hordes of National Armies? Will they rely on national chauvinism to serve their unknown interests? The world shudders to think of the implications..
[Slow pan of a Pelican stuffing Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism directly down its gullet]
Edited by Crow ()
wikipedia:
The transnational capitalist class (TCC or TNC), also known as the transnational capitalist network (TCN), in neo-Gramscian and other Marxian-influenced analyses of international political economy and globalization, is the global social stratum that controls supranational instruments of the global economy such as transnational corporations and political organs such as the World Trade Organization. In other words, it is "that segment of the world bourgeoisie that represents transnational capital". It is characteristically cosmopolitan and unconstrained by national boundaries.
The concept of globalization propounded here rejects both state-centrism (realism) and globalism (the end of the state). The transnational conception of globalization postulates the existence of a global system. Its basic units of analysis are transnational practices (TNP), practices that cross-state boundaries but do not originate with state agencies or actors. Analytically, TNPs operate in three spheres, the economic, the political, and the cultural-ideological.
https://www.globalpolicy.org/globalization/defining-globalization/27656-the-transnational-capitalist-class-and-the-discourse-of-globalization.html
most if not all major Western corporations have sections of their corporation structure dedicated to producing and reproducing these 3 spheres across the globe
methlabretriever posted:crow said it much better than me
Crow was mocking your antimarxist analysis
methlabretriever posted:how so?
because according to your analysis colonialism can only be undertaken by transnational capitalists. thats why he referenced doing away with lenin's imperialism. or just context, crow is ML, not some post-marxist going on about globalization as if its a new phenomenon
methlabretriever posted:but yeah, tncc was developed by gramsci and is very frankfoot schhool so. idk perhaps there only is national and compador bourgeoise
Yeah. Ydk.
methlabretriever posted:all a transnational capitalist class is is a faction of the bourgeoisie that influences economics, politics, and ideology beyond its national borders.
methlabretriever posted:but yeah, tncc was developed by gramsci and is very frankfoot schhool so. idk perhaps there only is national and compador bourgeoise
sorry dude, again youre wrong. gramsci had fuck all to say about this. he was dead long before it was proposed and as a leninist he would have laughed at the concept.
one of the problems with writing to get through censors is that your later interpreters will take your positions and run in whatever direction they want
Edited by Urbandale ()
note: this isnt me coming down against deep-state analysis. i think it can be quite useful in examining how states actually operate, but rather im arguing against those who claim that top capitalists suddenly dont care about the states they exist in because they all 'have more in common with each other' than the collective interests of the states they reside in. im also not saying that capitalists never diverge from the policy decisions of their respective countries, this happens all the time (nuclear power companies in the us are a good example of this).