• 0 Posts
  • 13 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: May 4th, 2024

help-circle

  • I specifically spoke of the USSR before what could be construed as Stalinism, whatever that would mean. I’m also on a fence whenever direct state ownership of the capital could be fairly described as socialism, as it was the case under Stalin from what I understand, but I won’t pretend I know all too much about that part. From what I’ve gathered, that would stand against the idea that the capital is democratically controlled by the workers working it, as it would instead by controlled by the outside force not completly dissimilar to the capitalist investors (in this case, the state, directed individually by some administrators). That always stood out for me when it comes to describing USSR as socialist country.


  • It’s disingenious to say that USSR achieved communism in 5 years between it’s inception and Stalin taking over. Especially since no one at the time have claimed achieving even socialism. Stalin took over country that attempted to build socialist society and struggled economically, and then led it in very different direction.

    Early USSR was ruled by communists, sure, but that’s far from it being communist country, and even further from the country achieving communism.


  • voldage@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zonereminder rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    28 days ago

    Calling Trump just a puppet is an overreach. He personally had boosting effect on the entire world right wing parties with his rethoric and charisma. With the personality cult working as the primary motivator for the right wing voters, I doubt that fascists could prop up anyone nearly as effective as Trump for that role. He IS sort of like their messiah that comes once in a century.

    I also toy with the thought that if there was any kind of propaganda ruling class would like you to believe and would try hard to influence you into believing, it would be something along the lines of the sentiment that violently removing them would be for some reason ineffectual. As opposed to playing the game THEY designed, mantain and oversee and trying to vote them out or use some sort of peaceful process to limit their power. That’s also contrasted by their insistance that they deserve to rule because they are in some way special, or whatever elitist argument people believing in meritocracy use. I do get the sentiment that removing figureheads might not do anything, as something that is somehow well known and estabilished, but, I mean, french royality sure did eat that cake. That train of thought might be something we’ve been implanted with, since logic doesn’t necessarily follow.







  • Nationalism as a function, to use your terms, doesn’t have to specifically be a result of a desire for cultural identity. It might, but when speaking of it as a function it has a narrower meaning and doesn’t have to carry additional baggage like that, though it may often imply it. When speaking of nationalism as ideology, it definitely fits my definition of evil, by putting artifical values above the wellbeing of people, which nationalism does by definition. Following that logic, nationalism as function isn’t necessarily evil (though it may be if you flavor it with racism or such, like Confederation did), while nationalism as ideology necessarily is. I’m not sure what specifically you were disagreeing with, so I hope I made my point clearer.


  • voldage@lemmy.worldtoMicroblog Memes@lemmy.worldGreatest ally
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Nationalism as a political ideology and nationalism as advocacy for independence of people sharing national identity that isn’t broadly recognized as official nation are two different things sharing the same name. Nationalism as political ideology is inherently evil, as it puts interests of an artifical construct above interests of people, with specific attention put to ingroup and outgroup dynamics. Separatists movements aren’t inherently evil, with the desire of liberation being usually something everyone can stand behind, but if those movements co-opt the nationalist ideology, then they may be classified as evil in my book. Or evil-er. There are no perfect victims and such.

    I feel like it’s a meaningful distinction to make.