The Democratic Party's Slide Into Irrelevance
Attaching a poll ... Dems unfavorability rating increased from 45% to 57% during the Biden Administration.
in buddhism they have the concept of near enemy and far enemy
it's very easy to spot the far enemy. for example, the far enemy of loving-kindness is hatred and ill will. but the near enemy is sentimentality and nostalgia. the near enemy is a counterfeit that mimics the original but undermines it.
bernie is the near enemy of socialism
in buddhism they have the concept of near enemy and far enemy
it's very easy to spot the far enemy. for example, the far enemy of loving-kindness is hatred and ill will. but the near enemy is sentimentality and nostalgia. the near enemy is a counterfeit that mimics the original but undermines it.
bernie is the near enemy of socialism
I certainly HOPE he's an enemy of socialism.
That said, he has self-identified as a 'Democratic Socialist.'
he wouldn't be a good near enemy if he didn't
in buddhism they have the concept of near enemy and far enemy
it's very easy to spot the far enemy. for example, the far enemy of loving-kindness is hatred and ill will. but the near enemy is sentimentality and nostalgia. the near enemy is a counterfeit that mimics the original but undermines it.
bernie is the near enemy of socialism
Yes exactly. And real socialists are the near enemy of Social Democracy.
I’m glad there are honest socialists on the forum that tell us they are happy if a Stalin-esque leader arises.
May I suggest for light reading https://www.marxists.org/reference/archi... An Interview with HG Wells in which he and Stalin discuss this very point in depth.
May I suggest for light reading https://www.marxists.org/reference/archi... An Interview with HG Wells in which he and Stalin discuss this very point in depth.
Consider what Stalin considers to be important:
Even if the Americans you mention partly achieve their aim, i.e., reduce these losses to a minimum, they will not destroy the roots of the anarchy which is inherent in the existing capitalist system. They are preserving the economic system which must inevitably lead, and cannot but lead, to anarchy in production. Thus, at best, it will be a matter, not of the reorganisation of society, not of abolishing the old social system which gives rise to anarchy and crises, but of restricting certain of its excesses. Subjectively, perhaps, these Americans think they are reorganising society; objectively, however, they are preserving the present basis of society.
and later
The banks, the industries, the large enterprises, the large farms are not in Roosevelt's hands. All these are private property. The railroads, the mercantile fleet, all these belong to private owners. And, finally, the army of skilled workers, the engineers, the technicians, these too are not at Roosevelt's command
..........
Terrible, and perhaps telling, logic error here:
There should be no such contrast, because collectivism, socialism, does not deny, but combines individual interests with the interests of the collective. Socialism cannot abstract itself from individual interests. Socialist society alone can most fully satisfy these personal interests. More than that; socialist society alone can firmly safeguard the interests of the individual. In this sense there is no irreconcilable contrast between "individualism" and socialism.
socialism subsumes individual interests, thereby preserving individual interests?
Another logical slip here:
You object to the simplified classification of mankind into rich and poor. Of course there is a middle stratum, there is the technical intelligentsia that you have mentioned and among which there are very good and very honest people. Among them there are also dishonest and wicked people, there are all sorts of people among them, But first of all mankind is divided into rich and poor, into property owners and exploited
I can see him standing up and yelling, finger up at the air, when raising his voice to begin, "But first of all..."
..........
1934-07-23
if Roosevelt makes a real attempt to satisfy the interests of the proletarian class at the expense of the capitalist class, the latter will put another president in his place
Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) won four U.S. presidential elections: 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944.
....
It seems to me that I am more to the Left than you, Mr. Stalin
I feel ya, bro.
cant imagine reading that and not seeing how Stalin was far more correct than Wells.
Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) won four U.S. presidential elections: 1932, 1936, 1940, and 1944.
this actually supports Stalin's argument in the debate.
Do the experts here believe the Democratic Socialists of America are a genuinely socialist organization? Or is that just a name.
May I suggest for light reading https://www.marxists.org/reference/archi... An Interview with HG Wells in which he and Stalin discuss this very point in depth.
I think Wells was a bit starstruck by Stalin and I found his points relatively weak compared to Stalin’s.
I did find this Tucker-meets-Putin-esque exchange at the end amusing.
Wells : I am very grateful to you for this talk which has meant a great deal to me. In explaining things to me you probably called to mind how you had to explain the fundamentals of socialism in the illegal circles before the revolution. At the present time there are only two persons to whose opinion, to whose every word, millions are listening : you, and Roosevelt. Others may preach as much as they like; what they say will never be printed or heeded.
I cannot yet appreciate what has been done in your country; I only arrived yesterday. But I have already seen the happy faces of healthy men and women and I know that something very considerable is being done here. The contrast with 1920 is astounding.
Stalin : Much more could have been done had we Bolsheviks been cleverer.
Wells : No, if human beings were cleverer. It would be a good thing to invent a five-year plan for the reconstruction of the human brain which obviously lacks many things needed for a perfect social order.
(Laughter.)
Stalin : Don't you intend to stay for the Congress of the Soviet Writers' Union?
Wells : Unfortunately, I have various engagements to fulfil and I can stay in the USSR only for a week.
I came to see you and I am very satisfied by our talk. But I intend to discuss with such Soviet writers as I can meet the possibility of their affiliating to the PEN club. This is an international organisation of writers founded by Galsworthy; after his death I became president. The organisation is still weak, but it has branches in many countries, and what is more important, the speeches of the members are widely reported in the press. It insists upon this free expression of opinion - even of opposition opinion.
I hope to discuss this point with Gorky. I do not know if you are prepared yet for that much freedom here.
Stalin : We Bolsheviks call it "self-criticism." It is widely used in the USSR. If there is anything I can do to help you I shall be glad to do so.
Wells : (Expresses thanks.)
Stalin : (Expresses thanks for the visit.)
