Guys, let's stop talking about such stupid memes. I see threads asking what you would do if you were a Communist dictator. What's the point of that? Why don't we talk about aftually doing real things to make progress.
Anyone have any predictions for the next 5 years or so? What if Trump wins? What if Bernie wins? What if Kamala wins? This board loves to throw these questions in the trash, but I think they're important. Each president would result in a very different America. It decides whether the Democrats die or go on life support for another term. If Trump wins the courts and states will go even more Authoritarian.
If Bernie wins, who knows what'll happen. I think it could go a few different ways, but I'm sick of this board saying that he'll be terrible. Of course he won't get much done, but this would be the first time in Long Decades that we've election even anything close to a Leftist President. We have to use it to our advantage. If 5 million people or March and demand action, I think Sanders is the one President that would use the mass crowds for the means, rather than the capitalist media and intelligence state.
What do you guys think? Just please think b before you type, discussion is already at a low level enough.
MOD EDIT: Continued discussion should be on general predictions for the future, which can involve the elections in the US; however, if the primary topic will be US candidates and their stature with respect to the status and health of the international socialist movement, please move to the US general
I have to believe, based on what I'm seeing here, that the bottom is falling out and America is currently in free-fall. It will only be a matter of time before the official economy catches up with what has been happening, and the excesses we see with literal concentration camps intensifying their activity are just a prelude for a more general slaughter of Americans by their own masters. I know people are being kicked off of the disability rolls in huge numbers, and once they're off they're pretty much dead, no matter how not-disabled they may be, because their disability record is a black mark against any sort of legitimate employment and the official economy has closed ranks to shut out such people. This will only accelerate in the future.
Bernie winning would just mean that America has found its Gorbachev and the collapse will commence. He won't have a choice, but the way Bernie acts looks a lot like Gorby's capitulations to capitalism, except Bernie is capitulating to Dengism / China (because the alternative is WW3).
If anyone other than Bernie wins, except maybe Warren, we're fighting WW3 and who knows what comes out the other end of that. Nothing good, and I don't think America can win that. This seems like the more likely case, with Trump being the likely figurehead for this.
What people think or want or vote for has very little relevance to what will happen. It's more a matter of what strategy is decided where real power resides and where real decisions are made. The inhabitant of the White House is often selected to fulfill some narrative, or at best is an impotent figurehead (and if worse comes to worse, the system we have can effectively cripple a President and allow the batshit insane Congress to go over his head, and those seats are gerrymandered and not even contested in much of the country).
The rest of the world hinges on America, with few exceptions. I don't know much of the situation in China but very likely they have put a lot more emphasis on building a real economy instead of the paper economy that we have, and are perfectly capable of weathering the collapse of America and the global financial system as we know it.
Eli Ross
The next depression happens, the class divide grows wider, people finally get sick of right wing politics and will have no choice but to turn to the far left, revolution by 2024. The next depression happens, he is powerless to fix anything, the right blames it on "socialist" economic policies, a fascist is elected in 2024 and we can kiss any dream of a revolution away.
If you're a real communist you should vote for Trump, and if you're a real fascist you should vote for Bernie.
They'll find a way to blame "socialism" regardless. According to neoliberal dogma, things like Social Security and Medicare are "socialism" and horrible poxes upon the economy, and it's the fault of these poor recipients for daring to live and shit. It's always the disabled they go after first, always. They wanted to make that an issue in 2016 but there was huge public outcry against it. They'll try to beat the "kill all disabled moochers" drum this cycle too, now that media control is tighter they know to suppress the internet outrage and make sure these stories are given pride of place in the news circuit, so boomers (now almost all getting retirement checks) will blame the disabled for taking their money. There are tons who already say it privately, my grandmother is one of them although she's silent (and she'll say this to me, someone on SSDI, when she's trying to be diplomatic, so just imagine what she says when I'm not around).
Justin Price
Americans would rather have their country -be ruled by a fascit dictator -let the government start genocide and segregration -have their country fractured into smaller states -have these smaller countries fight endless wars against each other over useless shitty places like nebraska and texas and start a small scale nuclear war between themselves -literally all die of radiatio poisioning and/or ethnic cleansing because it turned out they're 1/88th jewish than let a leftist revolution happen
American states nuking each other would mean every other county in the world is finally free to have their socialist revolution without USA trying to fuck their shit up so I'm all for that.
Cameron Hall
What if Biden or some other "return to normal" democrat wins?
Regardless of who wins I think civil war is more likely then a burger version of Gorby or WW3. Their is to much US-Chinease trade that benefits the Porkys of both countries to much for war to occur. Also Gorby only happened because the political class in the USSR benefited to from the collapse, the American political elite will not benefit from any form of collapse.
William Phillips
Any civil war in US WILL be WW3 in short order.
Nathan Rivera
Civil War is extremely unlikely. Why would the conservatives with all the guns start a civil war? Do you really think the fucking liberals are going to fight? Socialists are such a vanishingly small part of the population. The outright fash would be pathetically easy to co-opt into an authoritarian regime, what do you think ICE and Trumpism is? There's no faction that will fight a civil war, and no regional distinction that would be a viable base for it, and the only part of the country that has any separatist leanings already got rekt once. The only option would be a fascist takeover (which means WW3), and maybe the left has some balls left in them and will start killing the piggers, but if it comes to that it will be too late.
The benefit to some members of the American political elite in a Gorby scenario is that the American political system would collapse, and they would be insulated from the collapse largely as the lower classes and especially the uneducated poor are eradicated, which is line with their general ideology. Such an environment would enable the rise of something like the CCP's single party rule (shit, they might even call themselves socialists because the kids like that shit), and these people would be able to steamroll the remaining bourgs and people outside the know. They get the reward of unquestioned power and the kickbacks of having the Party in every orifice of every American, and they get the perks of getting in good with the CCP. Then the world unites in one big happy "socialist" family where the Party rules unquestioned, no messy revolution or civil war required, and no WW3. The collapse of America is inevitable, the question is what to do with it. Gorby capitulated because the alternative was fighting WW3 then and there, Reagan was a senile maniac led by the same people who run Trump now. He was shitty, but the writing was on the wall for the USSR in the 1970s; they could only have lasted a few more years even with competent leaders, and they did not have the option of China to go Dengist (America wasn't having it, again America's leaders were ready to fight WW3 because they're madmen).
Landon Gonzalez
This is probably a mistaken sentiment. Considering both sides are in an arms race and considering that they're currently in a trade war over China's rapidly improving high-tech capabilities, I think it's safe to say that trade interests doesn't trump national security interests especially considering MIC porkies' grip over defense spending and policy. This view that porky is some monolithic entity that rules supreme over all policy is a very simple and flawed analysis, but one that I see propagated alarmingly often by leftists.
Oliver Thomas
Purge all the trannies and lesbians, they are worthless parasites and they woud betray the revolution as soon as they are expected to contribute anything. Gays are good though, they are hardworking and selfless.
Colton Barnes
nice b8
Justin Brooks
This. The simplistic view of "what's good for the bourgeoisie as a whole is what's gonna happen" point of view is stupid as fuck. The variation most often propagated on this here board is the image of the porky as some genius conspiratorial class, able to act with supreme efficiency and unity.
Also, the idea that economic inter dependencies could stop a world war is the same exact sentiment that was prevelant in pre-WWI Europe, and it's a lethal delusion.
Be that as it may, I'm skeptical as to how capable the U.S. would actually be of fighting a world war. While many other factors - especially geopolitical and economic - that preceded and led to the WWI are now present, I don't think the people in the West are either willing or capable of fighting a sustained war, especially on global scale. Since Vietnam the capability of the U.S. to sustain a war or occupation has been declining. This is even more true for Europe. I believe the U.S. pivot to using air power and drones rather than full scale military operations is a result of this, and even they are immensely unpopular. The public reaction to their imbesillic attempt at Iran casus belli is another red flag, along with the incompetence with which it was carried out. The course and the consequences of the coming implosion of the U.S. is extremely hard to predict because while the direction is clear, there's not a single course of action that doesn't lead to even bigger problems - for including the elites.
Jonathan Russell
Hegemonic transitions can be peaceful, like the UK-USA transition. Even a war with Iran does not necessarily mean China involvement, perhaps only Russia and we don't even know that. A war with Iran would be another great fiasco, and probably the last one that the USA can sustain.
Anyway, I seriously don't catch the pathological obsession that the left has with fascism. Trump barely won in 2016 and even if he wins with more votes in the next election, it will only be because the democrat party choose too "radical" policies for the average anti-socialist american, and because he softened his rhetoric on immigration and minorities to expand his voter base. You can already see it: the most extreme right-wingers are disenchanted with the way he only talks about black and latino unemployment, and how he shifted the chore of his speeches from immigration to "america will never be socialist" bullshit. Yes you surely will say: "but what about the concentration camps?!?!". They are not concentration (extermination) camps. They are practically prisons where humans live in horrible conditions. What a surprise. Surely that's not the state of american prisons either. Surely that kind of inhuman treatment hasn't always been present. Surely migrants only started to die with Trump. It's fucking stupid. And if we call prisons fascism, we are seriously forgetting the meaning of that category as a way to enrich our analysis. "Authority" per se is not fascism (this is an autistic conclusion that I see quite a lot among anarchists), nor it is exploitation, human deprivation and misery; that's capitalism more broadly, and that's the way it has operated since the industrial revolution.
The issue that should concern us the most is climate change and the social apartheid that will come with it. Sadly, the world won't end in one day like in the movies; the skyscrapers won't fall and capitalism won't collapse. Most probable situation is a de facto apartheid between the richest people and the ones who will be condemned to inhabit an earth with extreme temperatures and massive migration.
Jayden Thomas
Isn't China's One Belt One Road project heavily dependent on Iran? Isn't Chinese energy requirements also heavily dependent on Iran in general? Tbh, I think Chinese involvement in such a conflict could be more likely than Russian involvement.
Asher Thomas
I've always thought we should print little copies of the manifesto as cheaply as possible and hand them out everywhere like the gideons
Juan Rodriguez
A Civil War would obviously be a class war. Their are a lot of red sentiments growing amount the lower classes in Burgerland. Many people are very angry about rising healthcare and rent costs, stagnant wages, and deindustralization.
The trade war right now doesn’t mean shit. Their is a huge entanglement between Chinese and American Capital. Also many kids of the Chinese elite are educated in Burgerland. I’m in an elite burger collage right now (summer session) and almost half of the kids are PRC exchange students.
Fair enough. Same goes for China and Russia.
The biggest benefit the US has in World Wars is isolation, because the US has no strong nabbers, the war will never be fought on American soil. So all the US has to do in World Wars is send over troops to it’s allies. The US would only enter a World War if it could be completely sure that it had NATO behind it. Their is no point in fighting a war with a country where their are no frontlines.
No that’s Pakistan. OBOR is very dependent on Pakistan allowing China to use the Gwadar Port bypass the Straights of Malacca. The reason why China uses Pakistan is because Pakistan boarders China, and both China and Pakistan hate India.
Christian Harris
Bump
Noah Nelson
2025: almost all human interaction has become a commodity. 30% of the population are employed pretending to be people's friends in exchange for money, and another 10% are "social influencers". buzzfeed - now the primary source for news - is considering capitalising on the popular meme questions from the last presidential debates by hosting an entire debate just for meme questions in the 2028 elections. furries are as mainstream as pop musicians. Hillary Clinton buys a fursona ironically. elon musk continues polluting space. everyone records themselves all the time and nobody knows why. twitter loves it. the line between art and marketing is obliterated. everything is a simulation of a simulation of an ironic replica of a simulation. none of it is as novel as it sounds, even ironically.
maybe we get UBI, maybe we don't. the core motivation of the future will be stupidity, not malice nor kindness.
Lucas Mitchell
In a future like one you describe, if I was him I’d be trying to leave Earth to.
Kayden Thomas
In the year 2024 a man in a fursuit will set foot on Mars, his fur pattern composed of the Tesla logo in the colours of MTN DEW. He will contaminate the local environment with spores bred in the Google labs, making it impossible for us ever to tell if there was any native Martian life. He will live on mars for 6 months, using a human scale rover to carve the URL of his patreon into the very rock of the red planet, then he will depart for home. Despite my prayers, his capsule will not burn up on re-entry to our planet. He will splash down just metres away from a pacific island nation that has long since slipped beneath the waves, to be carried back to San Francisco by a drone constructed by lockheed martin and microsoft. His first words to the traditional media (This entire farce having been live streamed for the internet but not TV, naturally) will be a meme that is theoretically only known to the most degenerate of fetishists, but is in reality better known than the current prime minister of great britain.
A class war would likely be a one-sided slaughter, and "socialists" (meaning anyone who isn't a full throated fascist or an enabler, except for the very rich and selected members of the professional class) will be sent to prison camps and dealt with. The police state in America has been preparing for exactly that and have been able to do everything so far with remarkably little resistance from the public.
Kevin Gray
As for WW3, WW3 means nukes and a lot of major urban centers becoming radioactive craters. Whatever comes out the other end of that is anyone's guess - it won't be le end of civilization or some nonsense like that, there will be organized states roughly corresponding to the nation-states that existed before, at least the major ones that had the nukes and continuation of government plans. But it would be the end of the United States of America in any recognizable form, and probably every other nation state would reform along new lines. The likely outcome is an explicitly eugenist state that starts killing off the undesired survivors (the elites and selected having been in secure bunkers and having a greater share of influence over the rest of the country, because what is everyone else going to do in the face of near-certain starvation and deprivation except trust the people with guns and the expertise to rebuild infrastructure?)
Robert Rivera
If you mean, a "class war" where small cells of adventurist idiots try to run around killing cops, then yes, you're exactly right (and that's very very likely in the USA). If you mean an ACTUAL class war, one where a significant portion of the US proletariat is participating, then it's a lot less likely. Trying to build enough camps to hold even one one-hundredth of the proletariat would be an impossible feat of infrastructure building and require huge funding and huge staffing, all on an emergency timeline.
Jordan Robinson
An "actual class war" would be the right wing activating their fascist paramilitaries, going door to door and slaughtering anyone they don't like. This sort of thing, at a small scale, is already happening, with the Proud Boys terrorizing neighborhoods and being enabled by Trump and the other retards in power.
They have the camps already - big camps. It would not take much to exterminate the occupants of the current ICE camps and fill them with dissidents. A situation just like this is what the camps were built to do, control large populations and exterminate them if need be. The prison system could also be turned into such a facility, either for extermination or forced labor camps, and private prisons benefit from economies of scale, so the more people can be locked up, the more efficient their appartus can be. Between the ICE camps, prisons, and the multitude of other means by which large populations can be controlled, something like 30-40 million people could be kept under lock and key, and systematic extermination would allow the camps to cycle in more undesirables. So, no, there is no practical limit to how far these camps can be taken, so long as there is enough population that is willing to support fascism and work actively towards its goals (and the institutions of ICE, DHS, and the national security state are quite numerous already, and capable of expanding their ranks rapidly if the police state is given the full backing of the financial system and allowed to write checks into infinity to hire more thugs).
Sebastian Reyes
You also have to remember that there IS no "working class" as a unified thing. The large number of lumpens and the working class proper are bitter and irreconcilable enemies, and it is very likely the initial stages will actually employ the so-called working class to eliminate the underclass of undesirables. If the working class is not enthusiastic backers of the police state, the desperate need for a paycheck and the police state hoarding all resources will buy compliance, at least for a while. What other choice does the so-called working class have, and what has the so-called working class historically done for the past 75 years? The stomach for broad resistance just isn't there, especially absent any economic support. If the left had the countryside on its side, it might be different, but the rural areas have been placated to an extent and have been kept under control by introducing the occasional fash agitator.
Hunter Powell
You do realize that if you killed30-40 million people everyone would have a friend or family member killed, such a government would likely be overthought by it’s military. (who are mostly economic conscripts)
The working class will revolt because the bottom is falling out of the American economic system and eventually push will come to shove and the paper economy will fall apart. Large scale multi-decade trade deficits are unsustainable.
Juan Gutierrez
You're underestimating just how many people have been sympathetic with fascism and Hitlerism in particular for a long time, and what institutional forces are enabling their retardation.
People HAVE had their family members killed by eugenics, and often can't find it in themselves to fight back. How could they, when any analysis of eugenics as a movement has been snuffed by anyone who could be a potential ally? If there was going to be a revolt, it would have happened a few decades ago. Now it is too late. We're doomed to a one-sided massacre and the lower classes have no defense, because they have no understanding of what they're even up against.
Jacob Williams
defeatist
Ryder Phillips
If you've seen nothing but your own face being stamped on for 35 years, as I have, you would be defeatist too. The socialist movement is so out of touch with reality and doesn't know how fucked they are (if they're not just honeypots meant to lure in the desperate). If the socialists had any sense they would be calling for eugenicist blood like 20 years ago, and I don't just mean saying that people they don't like are mean Nazis, I mean you go after the liberals for their support of the ideology and wage total war against all conservatism.
James Young
...
Isaiah Ward
So, we start fighting right away before we've amassed our class allies, thereby making us easy targets for even the most inept of National Guard recruits and militia rednecks.
Luke Turner
Lol, your cause is dead. It died the moment you failed to meaningfully attack eugenics in any way, thus ensuring that the lower classes will never be able to trust you as a reliable ally. I maintain that Marx was one of the worst things to ever happen to socialism and the movement of the lower class, but given the circumstances I don't see any real hope for us in any likely historical path.
Camden Russell
You start on the fringes, you don't necessarily call yourself socialists or have the hardline anti-eugenics movement marching with you for the peaceful plank, but you fucking mobilize these people because they are FUCKING DESPERATE and the only people pretending to give a shit are the lying Christian fascists or people selling them the anuddah shoah meme, turning people who should be your natural allies into fash enablers. There was something of an attempt to build a resistance to eugenics in the old left, but it was undone because the leadership of the socialists would do all sorts of pro-eugenics shit like supporting population control narratives (likely because their ideological / philosophical system was built by and for intellectuals rather than the lower classes themselves, and presumes an intellectual class de facto ruling over the masses that couldn't really self-organize).
Because eugenics necessarily creates a permanent class society that can only rule through forced ignorance and extreme violent power, applied constantly. The principles of scientific dictatorship were well understood in the 20th century, and very likely it was understood that such a system could persist essentially forever, so the socialists stopped trying to fight it and wanted to join it, turning against the multitude of the masses in a big way.
If you aren't 100% opposed to eugenics and population control, you don't have any business claiming you are fighting for the lower class, or the "working class", or that you present a movement that is even worth fighting for. That's why you can't have any appeal except with a few desperate fools that won't amount to anything, for whom socialism is just the vain hope that the government is going to pay for their medical bills or psychiatric treatment or something, since the right has roundly rejected them.
Jaxson Watson
I don't know who the fuck is, but yes, Marxism is opposed to eugenics. The question is, what made you think we weren't? Or, what made you think we didn't do a good enough job fighting it? Or, what can we do to fight it, if you insist that it's such a fundamental problem?
Am I just being a retard? I was under the impression gene editing fell under eugenics.
Ethan Gonzalez
If you were really opposed, you would recognize that eugenics is the dominant ideology in effect today, and it would be target #1 of revolutionary organizing. It has to be, at this point, because that is where the people are at the moment. But, the movement as I understand it draws from intellectuals, because that's where the power really resides in the current system and those are the people who can actually fight a revolution. There is a fundamental divide between the intellectuals who would be in a position to wage a revolution, and the lower classes who bear most of the consequences of eugenics and capitalism, and the two are fundamentally at odds with each other. The anti-eugenicists can't build a material basis to fight with, at least not easily, because control of knowledge itself is paramount to fighting a revolution and to the everyday business of any industrial, technological society.
