steve2470
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 01:33 PM
Original message |
Do any ex-Soviet era Russians see parallels in this Regime ? |
|
From what I know, we haven't talked much about the Soviet/Bush comparison (Soviet = 1917-1991).
|
cssmall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 02:11 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I only know what I've been told; however, this mirrors 1930s Germany. |
|
There is little comparasion between Bush and the Soviets, the only reason why you think there might be is because of the course the USSR took after the revolution. Remember, they technically were following Marxist precepts, but it proved the fatal flaw in Marx's work: the fact that no society remains classless. That's my own personal analysis.
The situation wasn't great in Soviet Russia, but from what I understand the talk of racial purity, homosexuality, theocratic tendancies and the aggrandizement of national dogma were fairly low (save the last one). Read the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich by Albert Spier. My guess is that you all ready understand all the salient points in this debate.
|
IrateCitizen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
3. You're mistaken on the "fatal flaw" in Marx's work... |
|
Remember, they technically were following Marxist precepts, but it proved the fatal flaw in Marx's work: the fact that no society remains classless.
Marx very much believed in class -- he believed that the working class, the proletariat, was different from the bourgeois class, and should maintain its own class consciousness. That would be the only way that it would prevail, by rejecting the false assumptions and contradictions that abounded in the industrial capitalism of his day and instead embracing their own class identity separate from the bourgeoisie.
Where he failed, and where the Critical Marxists (Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse) picked up was the extent to which cultural hegemony can be an agent of control in advanced capitalist society, eliminating the notion of class in the conscience of the population while it is, in fact, more deeply entrenched in the society.
The reason that the Soviets were different from Marx was Lenin's idea of a small, educated, determined core of party leaders who would seize power and overthrow the old order. By its very nature, it was bound to evolve into a party of a bureaucratic elite ruling over the masses, a near mirror-image of capitalist societies that had a bourgeoisie elite ruling over the masses. This was not an aspect of Marxism, but rather of Lenin's particular interpretation of Marxism.
|
cssmall
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Perhaps I am, however, I believe this a fairly common interpretation. |
|
The fact is that this is a simple dialetic: the proletariat being the thesis and the bourgeois being the anti-thesis and the product being the classless state or the synthesis. Marx said the overthrow of the bourgeois would lead the proletariat to create a classless state. I am talking post-revolution, specifically Russian and Chinese Communism aka Maoist and Leninist Communism.
I agree that Marx failed, I'll say failed. . .but I don't feel as if that is the word I want, to realize that hegemony could create that. But, how is hegemony created in a captialist society? Forgetting of historical memory save propagandized cultural memory, access to goods that are typically associated to higher society classes (in America, income groups) and the basic human necessity to "fit in" (border theory) lead to the creation of hegemony. For this I cite two of Michael Blakely's works in New York: the African Burial Grounds and his study on postbellum African American attitudes. Wonderful archaeology.
|
Strelnikov_
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 02:23 PM
Response to Original message |
2. They Do Resemble Soviet Communists |
|
Edited on Tue Aug-09-05 02:24 PM by loindelrio
It seems to be the Reich-Wing that wants a single party state, run by a privileged few, with minimal rights for those outside the party.
Communism, as implemented, was in practice a political system (the economic system was centrally planned command).
For the Reich-Wing, the economic system is just the means to gain (and keep) power.
|
Name removed
(0 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 08:19 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
|
west michigan
(522 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Aug-09-05 08:23 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Like an economic flight plan? |
|
Spending like crazy on this war while racking up major debt on our asian express card? Looks like we are running the same kind of gauntlet. How do we pay for all of this stuff?
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 25th 2024, 05:07 AM
Response to Original message |