Nick Fuentes the radical racist

[reer]

@Shimbiris like clockwork. small man syndrome.

 

[Shimbiris]

The first revolution swept one city

The second revolution swept half the world

The third will sweep the universe!

View attachment 374888View attachment 374889

Jokes aside, I’m with her. The USSR wasn’t socialist if you define socialism as worker ownership and control of the means of production. In practice, socialism would mean handing most of the economy to cooperatives where workers own stakes in their firms, elect managers and executives (or use workplace direct democracy for key decisions), and share the profits.

What the USSR achieved was a state, not worker, seizure of the means of production. The Party and state nationalized capitalist assets and ran a centrally planned economy. Workers were typically paid wages and had no direct ownership or democratic control over production or the managerial class. That’s why anarchists like Goldman often call Marxist-Leninist systems “state capitalism.” Not that state capitalism is the cartoon villain the US loves to portray. Those “commies” had real upsides, and their planned economies were impressive in many respects. Plenty of people from former ML states will tell you life felt more secure back then. Think social democracy and the welfare state on steroids.

With that established, I think the Soviet model beats modern capitalism in some ways, and I lean toward a hybrid: genuine socialism in the form of worker cooperatives alongside a state-capitalist layer with elected officials (i.e., republicanism). Picture a democratic economy where large enterprises are an even more democratic form of something like Mondragón-style co-ops, and where land not needed for state stewardship of natural resources, or for cooperative production, is returned to a state of "the commons" and free-range to us all.

The state then taxes large co-ops, smaller businesses (including sole proprietorships), and agrarian producers to fund national defense (border security), sound management of natural resources and the commons, and the building and upkeep of infrastructure. With an economically democratic system at its base, unlike under capitalism, that state apparatus has a real chance to stay democratic for the long haul.

Maybe I'm misguided but I personally feel Anarchists like Goldman are too idealistic and it's really not going to be possible to create a true Anarchist/Communist/Socialist state in a world where Capitalist and even Monarchist entities exist. You need an ML-like centrally planned state that truly works for the people, where the ML ninjas simply went wrong was denying worker's ownership of the means of production and the instatement of the commons.