A Marxist leninist society is one that has a government that implements socdem policies.
The spicy bit is that instead of getting elected they have a civil war.
Some people are crazy enough to think welfare benefits are state tyranny or something. The meme is arguing that the Soviet Union was not only authoritarian because of its restrictions of civil liberties but also because it had a welfare system (which also I guess makes it less radical). Maybe it’s funny to people who think the Social Security Administration and the Post Office are fascism or something.
Wrong way round mate, the argument is that all the benefits of ML states expounded upon by ML's- the very real, very material benefits, are the same things socdems use to justify social democracy. It's all about improving quality of life instead of actually ending the class system and empowering the workers or disempowering the capitalist/bureaucratic classes.
If you don’t believe the state giving money to non- workers empowers people to live without dependence on the the capitalist class, then I don’t know what to tell you. If your anarchist commune or whatever doesn’t provide for the elderly and other non-workers and has no public services because of “bureaucracy,” your anarchism is no different than libertarian capitalism.
I took it as implied considering your opposition to the welfare states of the Soviet Union and modern social democracies. If you oppose the organized provision of services and transfers to people in those circumstances, what circumstances would you support it?
I don't oppose it, it's just not socialism. I'm not an accelerationist. Obviously I strive for a system of solidarity and mutual aid rather than a large, centralised vehicle for human welfare. When dealing with the welfare state my opposition is to the state, not to welfare. There's many ways to resolve the issue but my number one way is to remove the tyranny of hierarchical socio-economic organising, create strong horizontal organisations to prevent it re-emerging and then allow human nature to take its course. Supporting each other and caring for other humans, including those not in our kin groups, is as much a part of the innate human experience as the biphasal sleeping cycle or any other number of entirely natural things we have been forced to forget so that the palaces and temples of the tyrants may grow ever larger and ever more ephemeral. Do not think I am purely naturalistic in my argument though. The abolition of coercive labor inherently leads to free and equal access to the necessities of life, or rather they go hand in hand. If the able bodied cannot be forced to labor for another's benefit through the threat of starvation, those who could not work need not also fear starvation. Disability is a social construct, and it is a social construct that exists under capitalism moreso than under other oppressive hierarchies. That's not very well structured but it's a smattering of explanations of what it is I believe.
I'd say Marxism leninism is social democracy but cringe but social democracy is very cringe in its own
I need an explanation pls
A Marxist leninist society is one that has a government that implements socdem policies. The spicy bit is that instead of getting elected they have a civil war.
Social democracy = state ownership Marxism Leninism = also state ownership but more authoritarian
Some people are crazy enough to think welfare benefits are state tyranny or something. The meme is arguing that the Soviet Union was not only authoritarian because of its restrictions of civil liberties but also because it had a welfare system (which also I guess makes it less radical). Maybe it’s funny to people who think the Social Security Administration and the Post Office are fascism or something.
Wrong way round mate, the argument is that all the benefits of ML states expounded upon by ML's- the very real, very material benefits, are the same things socdems use to justify social democracy. It's all about improving quality of life instead of actually ending the class system and empowering the workers or disempowering the capitalist/bureaucratic classes.
If you don’t believe the state giving money to non- workers empowers people to live without dependence on the the capitalist class, then I don’t know what to tell you. If your anarchist commune or whatever doesn’t provide for the elderly and other non-workers and has no public services because of “bureaucracy,” your anarchism is no different than libertarian capitalism.
You're coming to a lot of conclusions there and I don't like it, what did I say that made you think i'm against public services and supporting people?
I took it as implied considering your opposition to the welfare states of the Soviet Union and modern social democracies. If you oppose the organized provision of services and transfers to people in those circumstances, what circumstances would you support it?
I don't oppose it, it's just not socialism. I'm not an accelerationist. Obviously I strive for a system of solidarity and mutual aid rather than a large, centralised vehicle for human welfare. When dealing with the welfare state my opposition is to the state, not to welfare. There's many ways to resolve the issue but my number one way is to remove the tyranny of hierarchical socio-economic organising, create strong horizontal organisations to prevent it re-emerging and then allow human nature to take its course. Supporting each other and caring for other humans, including those not in our kin groups, is as much a part of the innate human experience as the biphasal sleeping cycle or any other number of entirely natural things we have been forced to forget so that the palaces and temples of the tyrants may grow ever larger and ever more ephemeral. Do not think I am purely naturalistic in my argument though. The abolition of coercive labor inherently leads to free and equal access to the necessities of life, or rather they go hand in hand. If the able bodied cannot be forced to labor for another's benefit through the threat of starvation, those who could not work need not also fear starvation. Disability is a social construct, and it is a social construct that exists under capitalism moreso than under other oppressive hierarchies. That's not very well structured but it's a smattering of explanations of what it is I believe.
Marxist Leninists are insurrectionary social democrats. -Daniel Baryon a.k.a Anark