Election 2020

[Bob Butler 54]

(11-17-2020, 02:52 PM)Einzige Wrote: The Democratic Party is not "loyal to the working man", lol. Even from a vulgar left-populist position (laborite capitalism - pro-unions, pro-welfare, etc.) the Democrats are loyal to specific segments of the working class- workers in the tech sector and finance, the actual Democratic base.

In reality, social democratic demands like "loyalty to the working class" are useless. What is necessary is nothing less than the self-abolition of the working class as a class.

Unions are useless in this struggle, indeed counterrevolutionary. Per Professor Paul Mattick:

In the FDR to LBJ period, the loyalty was real and unions were not useless.  From Nixon though now, pretty useless.  The elites and racists have frustrated the Democratic loyalty to the working man and minorities.  You are essentially correct though the unraveling, but not in general.  The Democrats have at least made the correct promises.  We will see how they deliver.

(11-17-2020, 02:52 PM)Einzige Wrote: All though the continued existence of capitalism, in either its private or state-capitalist forms, proved that the expectation of the growth of a new labour movement in the wake of the Second World War was pre mature, the continued resilience of capitalism does not remove its immanent contradictions and will therefore not release the workers from the need to put an end to it. Of course, with capitalism still in the saddle, the old labour organisations, parliamentary parties and trade unions, could also be maintained. But they are already recognised, and recognise themselves, as part and parcel of capitalism, destined to go down with the system on which their existence depends.

The revolution does not require a formalized Party at all. I would suggest studying Amadeo Bordiga's views on the matter.

There is a big difference between the idealized Marxist theory and what actually occurs when you try to implement it.  If you are going to win a revolution, you need organization, you need to control whoever is revolting.  Otherwise you loose the revolution.  If you organize enough to win, the folks once they get power have always become a new group of elites, more interested in maintaining power, profit, and keeping the people subdued than behaving according to the theory.  The leaders of the revolution become the new oppressive class.

Preventing this from happening is what it would take to make Marxism work.  Until that happens, there is a big gap between the theory of what will happen and what actually happens.  That gap is the reason communism and socialism are dirty words these days.  Marxism has so obviously and repeatedly failed that it is impossible to gather enough believers to try again.

I look at the Boogaloo Bois as Marxists without the theory and language, the theory and language being so much of ill repute that they have been dropped.  They are just no longer effective propaganda.  The Boogaloo Bois still believe capitalism is hopelessly broken, that violence is necessary to fix things, but they have recognized that the words, theory and justifications are not beneficial.  They turn people off.  Not that the raw unjustified actions of the Boogaloo Bois have attracted much of a following.  They are a tiny cult.  I don't know that they are any more relevant than those who still propose the old Marxist theory in spite of history repeatedly proving the theory wrong.

The American Revolution was the rare example of a bunch of violent people fighting for ideals which strove to keep the leaders from going bad.  Trump has demonstrated the leaders can still go bad, but he has been rejected.  We will see what occurs.  I am waiting for the Marxists to come up with something other than democracy to keep those that lead the revolution straight.  So far, nothing.  Until they propose some way for the people to check the elites, I figure their sad reputation has been well earned.