[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 30 points 11 months ago

Yes, it's also the guy who takes advice from the spirit of his dead dog. I'm not kidding.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Well, I'm Brazilian so I can tell you: they'll do it as many times as we allow them.

Since the 90s we had at least three neoliberal waves in Brazil with mass privatization and austerity measures, punctuated by center-left periods of "it's ok to enrich banks but let's at least guarantee that people can eat" periods.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Dude, I'm going to show you how to get rich with this simple trick:

step 1: find a dependent capitalist country and destabilize its government

step 2: find a way to destroy it's public infrastructure. Just coopt a local comprador class and defund everything, but if all else fails just start a war.

And so on.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's ripe for some good old neoliberal shock therapy and mass privatization.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml -2 points 1 year ago

libertarian

So. As he said, white supremacists.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I love how people use this kind of metaphysical argument, invoking human nature and such, and then have the nerve to call Marxism idealistic.

Marxist logic is literally about eschewing idealistic metaphysical arguments and focusing on the material conditions that influence history. Go read the Misery of Philosophy, people ffs.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 16 points 1 year ago

Fucking unionize then.

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’m not even going to comment on the EU being « authoritarian ».

As one small and simple example, ask the people in Niger if it doesn't feel authoritarian that they can't enjoy the material wealth of their country because France steals 80% of their Uranium, paying peanuts for it. Go ask France's former colonies how democratic it is for a foreign central bank to control their currency, artificially keeping it favorable for France to steal Uranium for peanuts. How nice it is for them that the material wealth that should be making their country rich, is going to subsidize the electrical bill of someone's fancy apartment in Paris.

Go ask people who live near mines owned by Swedish mining companies how much those companies bribed the local governments to allow them to pollute the fuck out of their countries, deregulate the fuck out of their labor laws, etc. See if they consider this democracy.

Go ask someone in Libya how democratic it was when a government that provided them with the best standards of living in the whole continent was bombed and removed from power because some French and American folks decided that it was time for his counter-hegemonic ass to go. And left a fucking mess of warlords and civil war in his place. Super democratic I guess. Not authoritarian at all.

The EU can only maintain itself relatively open and prosperous by fucking over their former colonies in ways their population mostly ignore. If your democracy at home depends on autocracy and destruction elsewhere to be maintained, how is it real democracy?

[-] swiftessay@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm a relatively old (let's say more than 40, less than 55) guy living in a dependent country in the periphery capitalism (Brazil). It always felt to me that building strong socialist movement in core capitalist places like the US or in Western Europe would be damn near impossible.

Back 20 years ago it felt like those countries had a very solid way of providing life's necessities and a more or less comfortable existence for a fraction big and politically strong enough of their populations that it would be really hard for organic movements to raise and make people see the exploitation. Hell, it's hard to talk about radical politics with workers here, who see the exploitation first hand and are mostly aware that the game is rigged against them. I imagine how hard it would be in a place where everyone you know have a car, a house and so on.

Of course that was built on the backs of the Global South. But it felt like exploitation had been exported to places where it was invisible and wouldn't make any waves back in the places to which this wealth was flowing.

I'm not a well versed in marxist theory to be honest. Just enough to understand we're all being fucked and need to take over. But I always thought that any next big revolutionary movement with international impact would start in super-exploited places like Latin America, South East Asia, Africa, ... I made an analogy with the Russian Revolution. The first revolution happening in a rich but relatively relatively peripheral country. It was Russia, not Germany or France. It wasn't the most advanced capitalist country. It was a place where there was enough capitalist development for a proletariat to emerge and material conditions that made proletarians more readily radicalizable for whatever reasons.

So, I thought, maybe it will be India or the Philippines, places that already have active revolutions going on. Maybe it will be Brazil, Malaysia, etc...

But this right-wing turn in politics in the last 10 years, the successive crisis and the need for more and more exploitation to keep ever increasing accumulation seems to be bringing over-exploitation right to the core of the system. More and more the working classes of Europe and the USA are being impoverished and denied what used to be available to them.

I wonder if that doesn't make those places a lot more prone to political radicalization than they were 20 or 30 years ago.

swiftessay

joined 1 year ago