[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | Free Show | Home]

What American socialist movements were most successful?

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 73
Thread images: 4

What American socialist movements were most successful?
>>
The overthrow of cissies.
>>
>>1683657
What do you mean by socialist movement? The socialists helped rally the call for 8 hour work days and they got that, so that's a pretty big deal
>>
The military industrial complex
>>
>>1683657
Civil rights
>>
>>1683657
The Long March
>>
>>1683664
Didn't know that, more on this?
>>
>>1683657
America never had a real "socialist" movement. But they did have strong populist movements with Thomas Watson and William B Jennings in the late 19th century, as well as Father Coughlin and Huey Long in the early 20th. Social leftists pretty much destroyed any chance of a new working class movement in the 1970s by co-opting it into their New Left movement.
>>
>>1683657
New Deal was state socialism. There were communists in governement places until the Soviet-Nazi pact
>>
>>1683752
****state capitalism, I dun goofed
>>
>>1683657
Probably unionists fighting for better working conditions, especially in the 1930s and before
>>
>>1683657
Historically?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Workers_of_the_World
>>
>>1683674
This the ivy league donates more money to socialist than conservative causes.
>>
>>1683748

>America never had a real "socialist" movement.

That's completely wrong.
>>
>>1683664
this is the only thing i could think of that actually did something
>>
>>1683657

Wasn't a success, but I imagine Bernie Sanders is the best polling socialist america has seen in a long time.
>>
>>1683664
And a minimum wage. And the abolition of child labor.
>>
If I recall correctly, Huey Long had a pretty decent following before his assassination.
>>
>>1683748
What the fuck? The socialist party was hugely popular in the WW1-era Midwest, and the Communist Party was a major political faction twenty years later.

In the 60s the expressly socialist Black Panthers made their mark on US history.
>>
>>1683657
new deal democrats and third world immgiration
>>
>>1683752
Keynesianism isn't state socialism at all
>>
>>1684090
>keynsianism isn't exactly my definition of socialism, therefore it isn't heavily socialist in nature
kek
>>
>>1684103
What do you think socialism is?
>>
>>1684103

Keynesianism isn't socialist by any reasonable standard. It's a variant of capitalism. Keynesianism demands an economy that is primarily market driven.
>>
>>1684105
communism is state seizure and control of private assets, more generally

socialism is the state interference via extensive laws and incentive structures of private industry

keynsianism is the heavy subsidization and market rate manipulation of industry, which leads to an indirect control via favored industries

a rose by any other name.
>>
>>1684115
Right, but that's not correct.

Communism refers to a stateless and classless society where workers, not capitalists or aristocrats, control industry.

Socialism refers to ANY society in which the workers control industry.

Keynesianism is a capitalist ideology, and therefor non-socialist.
>>
>>1684113
socialism claims that the central state can appropriately reorganize industry in the best interests of people. that's a CLAIM

keynsianism claims that central government can best reorganize productive incentives for the good of capitalism. that's a CLAIM

both systems derive power from centralization of economic power in the hands of the state. the difference is who they CLAIM to help. the claim doesn't effect their government or economic structure, both of which reroute money to special interests.

/his/ is the stupidest board.
>>
>>1684133
so you're going to define a system by an ideal state of existence which has never actually come into being?

that's fucking dumb. I might as well wear a pony costume and declare that my soul is a horse.

a system can CLAIM to be something. do those claims have substance? no

/his/ is the stupidest board.
>>
>>1684115
Nah dude, socialism is just when workers control the means of production, like factories or mines.

Stare control isn't socialist unless the state itself is controlled by workers.
>>
>>1684133

>Communism refers to a stateless and classless society where workers, not capitalists or aristocrats, control industry.

I'm going to agree with >>1684142 on that. You can't define an economic system by an imaginary utopia that has never existed.

However, this does not change the fact that Keynesianism is a form of capitalism.
>>
>>1684148
right. so modern france isn't socialist, despite having socialism in its name, socialists as teh ruling party, socialism as the guiding ideology. and neither was the USSR communist, despite calling itself communist, usng communist ideology as the guiding principle, etc.

got it, buddy.

are you aware that socialism itself doesn't claim to want to put workers in control of the means of production directly, but to do it via democratic means of a central state?

whatever

/his/ is the stupidest board. I'd really like to see a survey of the average age here
>>
>>1684142
Why is that dumb?

Communism refers to a very specific and vaguely utopian circumstance. Every communist experiment has been an attempt to create this kind of environment.
>>
>>1684150
But that's what communism means.

The USSR and Maoist China were not examples of communism or ever purported to be.
>>
>>1684158
and the result of every experiement has wildly diverged from the ideal and ended up with exactly the same circmstances, which is the concentration of power into the hands of a small elite which ends up starving half the country to death and killing the others.

is communism an ideal only, or is it also a real system? if "ideal communism" always turns into "dead people communism." so it seems that those ideals KILL people.

hmmm.

/his/ is the stupidest board.
>>
>>1684156
The French socialist party isn't socialist. Neither is Bernie Sanders' platform. All political theorists would corroborate this.

Across the Cold War, some socialist parties abandoned demanding worker control (the definition of socialism) to keep their membership.

Socialism isn't necessarily statist. One of the most popular socialist ideologies is anarchism, and anarchists obviously want nothing to do with the state. Communists, by contrast, believe the state should exist as a means to redistribute control of industry and then abolish itself.

Very few socialists believe the state should exist as a permanent institution. Even Joseph
fucking Stalin believed that the Soviet government was ostensibly a temporary instrument of social reorganization.
>>
>>1684156
The USSR was communist in that it wanted to create communism.

Some members of the French socialist party are socialists, but most of them don't seem to want to create socialism.
>>
>>1684181
okay, so what you're saying is that we can't believe what a person NAMES himself,because he can lie

what what a person CLAIMS to want to do can be believed?

wow, you're so smart.

hey, what's your bank account number and password? I dont NAME myself a helper, but I'm making the claim that my ideology revolves around helping you.

go ahead, post your social security number

OR maybe it's a better idea to classify people according to what they DO and not what they CLAIM

/his/ is the stupidest board
>>
>>1684171
You're not following.

"Dead people communism" isn't communism. Stalin and Mao never said it was. They believed ruthless measures were acceptable to achieve a stateless and classless society, but this is effectively impossible because the state became too powerful to "wither away" like Marx intended.

The problem with the Leninist model of communism is that it's meant to emerge out of prosperous liberal capitalism, and then spread abroad. Marx believed that once industrial workers made up the cast majority of the population, they could take control of industry without much resistance.

Every successful communist revolution has occurred in agrarian societies without much of a proletariat at all. Following the Leninist model, communists in Russia and China and Cuba assumed dictatorial power to "preserve the revolution", and killed millions in pursuit of their goals because there was no way for the people to stop them.
>>
>>1684190
A communist is somebody who wants communism.

The USSR was communist because the people in charge wanted communism.

Do you understand now?
>>
>>1684203
right, since you believe what a person CLAIMS to be doing is so important, give me your social security number and bank account number

oh, wait, that's RETARDED. you don't want to do that. because it's RETARDED, and you're a RETARD. but somehow you think this is a good basis to deal with millions of other people's fates regarding whether they starve to death or not.

hey, thanks for taking so much more care of your own life, and disregarding others.

kys
>>
>>1684163

>But that's what communism means.

In theory, maybe.

But in practical terms, the USSR and Maoist China are examples of communist states. How could they not be? They are countries where communists literally took over the government.
>>
>>1684206
What a person says he wants is the deepest level of sophistication we can achieve in political analysis, and of course, it's a completely reliable system.

You're so smart.
>>
File: 1469144517992.jpg (46KB, 457x700px) Image search: [Google]
1469144517992.jpg
46KB, 457x700px
>>1684218
>the literal definition includes statelessness
>but my feelings dictate that these examples are what communism is about
>>
>>1684228

The Bolsheviks were communist, yes?

And they took over the Russian government, yes?

So then the USSR was communist. Or at least it had a government that supported communism, which is basically the same thing.
>>
>>1684213
You're fucking stupid if you can't grasp what I'm saying.

Communism refers to and has always referred to a specific utopian model for society.

Communists are people who try to get there. The USSR was not communism, but either state socialism or state capitalism, depending on who you ask.

Why do you think it was called the "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" instead of "Commune of Russia"? Why do you think communists in Russia and China and Cuba talked about furthering the revolution decades after they seized control of the state?
>>
>>1684224
Nigger, you gave faulty definitions of socialism and communism so I corrected you.

Either read a book or grow a thicker skin.
>>
>>1684237

>The USSR was not communism

Was the government of the USSR run by communists or not?
>>
>>1684218
Right, that's Marxism-Leninism, a socialist plan for a achieving communism.
>>
>>1684235
So if declared myself a monarchist, seized control of some country, and installed a representative democracy, does that make the state a monarchist?
>>
>>1684247

If they were trying to bring about a communist state, then they were in fact communists. It is not inaccurate to say that USSR was communist.
>>
>>1684235
M8 this is what we're trying to tell you.

A communist is a person or group of people or even a state that want to create a stateless and classless society where workers control the means of production.

The USSR was communist because it wanted to create communism. That doesn't mean they ever succeeded.
>>
>>1684254

If you're not trying to create a monarchy, then no, you're not really a monarchy.

But the USSR was sincerely trying to create a communist state, so they were in fact communist.
>>
>>1684262
But I'm trying to create a monarchy. By your logic, the republic I have just created is a monarchy.
>>
>>1684090
Alright, I just wanted to point out the fact that there were socialists and communist party members in the Administration. That would count as a major achievement for american socialist movements.
>>
>>1684261
what if I call myself a "fucking retard" and the definition of a "fucking retard" was to try and create a square circle, and make 2+2=5.

now, every state I try to create, which fails to make a square circle, fails to do so. therefore, I am not actually a "fucking retard." I happen to kill millions of people in the interrim, but it is incorrect to classify "fucking retards" according to their actual accomplishments. we must only call a "fucking retard" someone who squares a circle.
>>
>>1684256
A communist state is any state run by communists. Communism refers to the utopian economic model.

The goal of the USSR was to actually abolish the state, and abolish classes, so that worker collectives could control industry instead of the government dominating the economy.

Lenin thought it would happen really quickly, but the Civil War and WW2 and the Cold War forced the ultimate goal of communism to be placed on the back burner.
>>
>>1684256
>>1684273
>>1684262

They were communists because they wanted communism, but their state wasn't an example of communism. By definition a state cannot be communism.

What's confusing about this?
>>
>>1684270
I have no idea what you're trying to say
>>
>>1684281
ah, I get it. someone who tries to square a circle is a "fucking retard" but his attempt is not "fucking retarded" because he didn't accomplish something impossible. we can't classify killing millions of people "fucking retarded" because it doesn't square a circle
>>
File: 1468454858596.png (798KB, 800x481px) Image search: [Google]
1468454858596.png
798KB, 800x481px
>>1684283
I'm not suprised, if you can't follow a basic analogy maybe you shouldn't be discussing this.
>>
File: 7ef.jpg (29KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]
7ef.jpg
29KB, 600x600px
>>1684270

>By your logic, the republic I have just created is a monarchy.

If you created a republic, then that means you weren't really a monarchist because you weren't sincerely trying to create a monarchy.

However, the people in charge of the USSR (at least in the beginning) were sincerely communist. And so it follows that the USSR was communist.
>>
>>1684309
Who decides if I am geniunely a monarchist? It is still my intention to create a monarchy, but instead a republic has arisen. Does that mean that the republic is a monarchy?
>>
socialism and communism are literally "dunning kruger: the ideology" and "kill your victim, then say it was his fault: the government."

speaking of it favorably should be punishable by revoking any high school diploma and voting rights
>>
>>1684290
How old are you?
>>
>>1684309
Being communist isn't the same thing as successfully creating communism.

The USSR was a communist country bedside it was run by communists, but it was not an example of communism.

Do you see what we mean?
>>
>>1684314
you're trying to boil down a system of economics and government to the intentions of the people in those systems (according to what YOU think they were thinking) rather than attempting to define those systems mechanically by their processes and systems.

you might be a nerd, and weak, and got bullied. none of that means you're smart. you can enjoy history if you like. that doesn't mean you understand anything.
>>
>>1684312

>Who decides if I am geniunely a monarchist?

I do. I'm the person you're talk to after all.

>It is still my intention to create a monarchy

And are you actively working towards that goal?

>but instead a republic has arisen

Seems pretty bizarre for a monarchist to take over a country and then somehow end up making a republic instead. That sounds like you never actually took over.
>>
>>1684322
As a revolutionary state, it's incredibly important to discuss what the USSR was trying to become.

What do you think all those five year plans were about?
>>
>>1684322
Please read a book about communism. Any book.

Even fucking wikipedia will explain why you're wrong.
>>
>>1684333
>my opinon literally invalidates your intentions and goals

Holy Christ, do you have any idea how delusional you sound?

I could provide every shred of evidence that my goal is to form a monarchy and you would still say that I am not a monarchist.
>>
>>1684333
What if I'm a monarchist actively working toward that goal by prohibiting democracy, imprisoning or killing non-monarchists, reorganizing the country based on feudal estates, and forcibly redistributing resources to create an aristocracy and a peasant class? Once this done, we can talk about becoming a monarchy.

That's essentially what Stalin was doing
>>
>>1684336
ah, right, the old
"you don't know islam because you haven't studied islam for 20 years in a madrasa" argument

right, it's almsot like you can't actually provide a functional definition of things based on how things WORK based off their effects or reality.

wow, consider me enlightened

I'm done with this fucking board. you're just a bunch of 90 iq nerds who got beat up but wree never actally good at anything, so you retreated into loser fields.
>>
>>1683657
none of them
Thread posts: 73
Thread images: 4


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]

I'm aware that Imgur.com will stop allowing adult images since 15th of May. I'm taking actions to backup as much data as possible.
Read more on this topic here - https://archived.moe/talk/thread/1694/


If you need a post removed click on it's [Report] button and follow the instruction.
DMCA Content Takedown via dmca.com
All images are hosted on imgur.com.
If you like this website please support us by donating with Bitcoins at 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties.
Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site.
This means that RandomArchive shows their content, archived.
If you need information for a Poster - contact them.