Can a Marxist revolutionary get elected president and sort out the economy?

[amadeus]

Is it Cuba??

Since you are bent on being ridiculous I’ll do the same: yes, Poland is Cuba.

 

[Ajidica]

Is it Cuba?? It doesn’t change anything. He’s still generally encouraged to buy in against other people on the basis of making sound investments. He can think that right until his warmongering masters get his grandkids killed.


No such thing generally. Freedom of expression in a bourgeois country is limited by things like libel and slander laws. Even if you’re speaking the truth, you still need to pay for a lawyer.

In America, I can stand in the capitol and shout "Down with Reagan". In the Soviet Union, I can stand in the capitol and also shout "Down with Reagan". Clearly, the two societies are the same.

As far as warmongering goes, how many Cubans were killed in Africa so Castro could get international Good Boy Points by supporting a lot of not very nice people?
Such as ordering Cuban troops to defend Chevron oil platforms in Cabinda from Marxist rebels.

 

[Crezth]

In America, I can stand in the capitol and shout "Down with Reagan". In the Soviet Union, I can stand in the capitol and also shout "Down with Reagan". Clearly, the two societies are the same.

Ah, 1985 called, it wanted its Iran Contra style joke back.

As far as warmongering goes, how many Cubans were killed in Africa so Castro could get international Good Boy Points by supporting a lot of not very nice people?
Such as ordering Cuban troops to defend Chevron oil platforms in Cabinda from Marxist rebels.

And so what is your point? It would seem to me like that war and struggle to control nations are a part of societies whether they subscribe to Marxist type ideas or not. See, I’m not the one trying to prove an outrageous statement like this system is perfect and will prosper forever. I’m only pointing out how insane that is to think in general. I don’t have to prove Cuba is perfect, only that it works well enough and for specific enough purposes that the forces which brought it into being could some day avail another. If your problem is that you’re a nation of slaves owned by foreign capitalists, you can certainly find yourself having enough reasons to support a revolution. And the ensuing system will certainly not be perfect, because it’s a human system, but it will exist and perhaps be better at delivering certain vital services on which its legitimacy lies. Those services may not include capital markets or legalized gambling rings for emerald slave mining futures, but they might include food and water and cheap medicine.

In my perspective, these things happen because greedy masters let the wheels fall off. And the nature of societies is to continue to change anyway. I’ve seen enough cruelty from all hypocrisies to know it doesn’t make a difference in the long run.

 

[Voidwalkin]

It would seem to me like that war and struggle to control nations are a part of societies whether they subscribe to Marxist type ideas or not

This same spirit, which is correctly identified imo, is also simultaneously why Marxist nations almost universally remain dictatorships and descend into cronyism rather than serve any proletariat.

That risk is present in Sri Lanka, surely, given that the history of that party. I wouldn't trust em.

 

[Ajidica]

Ah, 1985 called, it wanted its Iran Contra style joke back.

Sorry you didn't find it funny, you must have heard it already. The Stasi has the largest collection of political jokes in history.

And so what is your point? It would seem to me like that war and struggle to control nations are a part of societies whether they subscribe to Marxist type ideas or not. See, I’m not the one trying to prove an outrageous statement like this system is perfect and will prosper forever. I’m only pointing out how insane that is to think in general. I don’t have to prove Cuba is perfect, only that it works well enough and for specific enough purposes that the forces which brought it into being could some day avail another. If your problem is that you’re a nation of slaves owned by foreign capitalists, you can certainly find yourself having enough reasons to support a revolution. And the ensuing system will certainly not be perfect, because it’s a human system, but it will exist and perhaps be better at delivering certain vital services on which its legitimacy lies. Those services may not include capital markets or legalized gambling rings for emerald slave mining futures, but they might include food and water and cheap medicine.

In my perspective, these things happen because greedy masters let the wheels fall off. And the nature of societies is to continue to change anyway. I’ve seen enough cruelty from all hypocrisies to know it doesn’t make a difference in the long run.

I thought you were defending Cuba, not both-sides-are-bading the situation.
I'm sure the Cabindan freedom fighters were thanking Castro as his troops shot them to defend Chevron oil platforms. Marxist freedom for Cubans, bullets for uppity natives. Almost sounds British when you put it like that.

EDIT: To remain on topic, even the historian Robert Service (no friend of the communists) commented that in Indian states where Marxists won elections, they had markedly better economic performance, education, and health outcomes than other states. Indian socialists almost remembered to oppose suspension of political rights, so that's a plus on them.
(Also, hilariously, the Soviet Union supported Gandhi during the Emergency, even as Indian security services were busy rounding up and torturing members of the Communist Party of India.)

 

[GenMarshall]

Ah, 1985 called, it wanted its Iran Contra style joke back.

It doesn't negate Ajidica's point that you are free to criticize the US government without getting persecuted. In the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc nations (For which Poland WAS a part of), if you criticize the Communist Government and it's party, you're detained by the secret police. In the United States, I can freely criticize Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid Brezhnev, and other Soviet leaders that ruled before the implementations of Perestroika and Glasnost. If I did the same thing in the Soviet Union, I'd get sent to the gulags by the KGB (or the Stasi if I were an East German citizen).

This same spirit, which is correctly identified imo, is also simultaneously why Marxist nations almost universally remain dictatorships and descend into cronyism rather than serve any proletariat.

That risk is present in Sri Lanka, surely, given that the history of that party. I wouldn't trust em.

Given Marxist and Communist's histories of being oppressive totalitarians. I wouldn't trust the Sri Lankan JVP party to willingly give up their power if they're elected into it. Like Stalin and the rest of the power hungry authoritarian communists, they will consolidate control and never give up control. Nor would I'd entrust them to respect other people's freedoms and property rights.

 

[amadeus]

(Also, hilariously, the Soviet Union supported Gandhi during the Emergency, even as Indian security services were busy rounding up and torturing members of the Communist Party of India.)

Not a surprise when (as I am sure you know) Brezhnev’s ambassador to the U.S. just a few years before asked Nixon “hey, would you mind if we nuked China? We can do it together if you want!”

 

[Zardnaar]

Is it Cuba?? It doesn’t change anything. He’s still generally encouraged to buy in against other people on the basis of making sound investments. He can think that right until his warmongering masters get his grandkids killed.


No such thing generally. Freedom of expression in a bourgeois country is limited by things like libel and slander laws. Even if you’re speaking the truth, you still need to pay for a lawyer.

You don't generally get killed for it though or get sent to prison at least not without breaking some other law.

 

[Zardnaar]

It doesn't negate Ajidica's point that you are free to criticize the US government without getting persecuted. In the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc nations (For which Poland WAS a part of), if you criticize the Communist Government and it's party, you're detained by the secret police. In the United States, I can freely criticize Joseph Stalin, Nikita Khrushchev, Leonid Brezhnev, and other Soviet leaders that ruled before the implementations of Perestroika and Glasnost. If I did the same thing in the Soviet Union, I'd get sent to the gulags by the KGB (or the Stasi if I were an East German citizen).


Given Marxist and Communist's histories of being oppressive totalitarians. I wouldn't trust the Sri Lankan JVP party to willingly give up their power if they're elected into it. Like Stalin and the rest of the power hungry authoritarian communists, they will consolidate control and never give up control. Nor would I'd entrust them to respect other people's freedoms and property rights.

Other communists do leave power when voted out.

So benefit of the doubt and all that. Previous Sri Lanka governments have been terrible.

 

[Crezth]

This same spirit, which is correctly identified imo, is also simultaneously why Marxist nations almost universally remain dictatorships and descend into cronyism rather than serve any proletariat.

Cronyism may as well be called loyalty to within and not to without. You have a local union boss, he's very corrupt, but he funnels a lot of money into his neighborhood; the cops don't get involved in anything useful, so he takes care of the peoples' problems, in exchange for effectively running the local government. He naturally benefits himself. You might say that his self-interest in helping his neighborhood is supplied by his self-interest in being the one in charge. This is not only very normal, to all places and all political systems, but it happens all the time regardless of whether you get Marxists anywhere. You could say "cronyism" is what killed Boeing's own competitiveness. It's not too different from the arguments that cronyism killed the Soviet Union by making it dependent on unaccountable gangsters. I kinda think this might just be the nature of power, especially in the age of global reach and no real accountability to anyone, ya know? I mean, who is Musk accountable to? Mr. Brags about dosing on ketamine and allying with Russia and keeps his security clearance? Kiiinda seems like there's a little more going on than good capitalists make good money and make everyone happy uwu versus evil jealous losers try to take everything from everyone, those meanies!

That risk is present in Sri Lanka, surely, given that the history of that party. I wouldn't trust em.

I mean you really haven't addressed it enough for anyone to say.

Sorry you didn't find it funny, you must have heard it already. The Stasi has the largest collection of political jokes in history.

I thought you were defending Cuba, not both-sides-are-bading the situation.
I'm sure the Cabindan freedom fighters were thanking Castro as his troops shot them to defend Chevron oil platforms. Marxist freedom for Cubans, bullets for uppity natives. Almost sounds British when you put it like that.

Who exactly on this forum do you think is paying little enough attention to believe that you actually care about natives getting shot for, like, any reason?

EDIT: To remain on topic, even the historian Robert Service (no friend of the communists) commented that in Indian states where Marxists won elections, they had markedly better economic performance, education, and health outcomes than other states. Indian socialists almost remembered to oppose suspension of political rights, so that's a plus on them.
(Also, hilariously, the Soviet Union supported Gandhi during the Emergency, even as Indian security services were busy rounding up and torturing members of the Communist Party of India.)

Yeah, I mean, it's called politics. I can assume based on experience that you might be alluding to some stance separating the "authoritarian" communists i.e. the USSR and the "libertarian" communists like Marxist Indian socialists, but it's too vague to even be tendentious.

It doesn't negate Ajidica's point that you are free to criticize the US government without getting persecuted.

I mean arguably Julian Assange and, hell, let's just say Trump prove that this is not the case.

You don't generally get killed for it though or get sent to prison at least not without breaking some other law.

How do you know? I think you're just flat out wrong about this. I also think it's pretty relational. White auto dealership owners can storm congress and get a slap on the wrist, undocumented migrants get the fuzzy shackles.

 

[Gorbles]

As apparently all efforts to subtly redirect to Samson's point have bitten the dust, I just want to say this for people who believe people don't get Vanished™ in the holiest of holy, the US of A.

Google "Ferguson protestors", eh? Cheers!

 

[Tee Kay]

So talking about Sri Lanka specifically as opposed to the experience of "Marxism" in other parts of the world or theoretically, it's not like Sri Lanka hasn't had Marxist parties or parties inspired by Marxist ideas prominently in politics before.

The country renamed itself a "Democratic Socialist Republic" in the 1970s and various communist parties have been parts of governing coalitions in the past, including the JVP.

On mainland South Asia you had elected communist parties governing states of India. Further north Nepal has had ex-rebel Maoist parties in government fully participating in electoral democracy.

What would the JVP be like if it comes to power? Kerala, West Bengal, and Nepal are much better examples to look at than the USSR, Cuba, or North Korea.

 

[Zardnaar]

So talking about Sri Lanka specifically as opposed to the experience of "Marxism" in other parts of the world or theoretically, it's not like Sri Lanka hasn't had Marxist parties or parties inspired by Marxist ideas prominently in politics before.

The country renamed itself a "Democratic Socialist Republic" in the 1970s and various communist parties have been parts of governing coalitions in the past, including the JVP.

On mainland South Asia you had elected communist parties governing states of India. Further north Nepal has had ex-rebel Maoist parties in government fully participating in electoral democracy.

What would the JVP be like if it comes to power? Kerala, West Bengal, and Nepal are much better examples to look at than the USSR, Cuba, or North Korea.

Well a recent Sri Lankan government was so terrible the Communist's might actually be an improvement.

I doubt anyone here knows enough about Sri Lankas internal politics (including myself).

I expect them to fail not because they're communist more systematic issues in the economy, corruption, etc. Anyone's going to struggle to fix that.

 

[Samson]

Sri Lanka election goes to historic second count as the encumbant is eliminated

For the first time in the country's history, Sri Lanka's presidential election has gone into a second round of counting after no single candidate won more than 50% of the vote.

The election commission will now count voters' second and third choices for president - people were asked to mark up to three candidates in order of preference during the election.

The first round, which saw the counting of people's primary choice of candidate, had Anura Kumara Dissanayake, a leftist politician in the lead with 42.31%. Opposition leader Sajith Premadasa is in second place with 32.76%.

In a press conference, the election commission said that all other candidates apart from Dissanayake and Premadasa have been eliminated. Incumbent president Ranil Wickremesinghe won 17% of the vote, putting him in third place in the polling.

 

[Samson]

We have answer to the first bit:

Dissanayake declared winner

Dissanayake has been declared the winner of the presidential election, according to the election commission.

 

[warpus]

Again, you're talking conceptual, instead of practical. This thread is about a particular real-world example which we can discuss instead of indulging in the same repetitive arguments.

Okay so.. answer my questions in practical terms. What do you think I was asking for, an impossible hypothetical?

So far the only answer I have gotten is: "Well look at Cuba, it isn't so bad". Is that the best argument for Marxism possible?

 

[Gorbles]

Okay so.. answer my questions in practical terms. What do you think I was asking for, an impossible hypothetical?

So far the only answer I have gotten is: "Well look at Cuba, it isn't so bad". Is that the best argument for Marxism possible?

I recommend Samson's post directly above yours, and Tee Kay's here for your answers.

 

[Samson]

Okay so.. answer my questions in practical terms. What do you think I was asking for, an impossible hypothetical?

So far the only answer I have gotten is: "Well look at Cuba, it isn't so bad". Is that the best argument for Marxism possible?

We shall have to see. The thing is that the previous solution, which you could call the capitalist solution, was for the people to bear most of the pain. This may have been primarily because it was negotiated from the Sri Lankan side by an arch-capitalist. It could be the not being controlled by the moneyed classes will be enough to get a better deal out of the IMF. If he pulls it off and improves peoples lives that may put a dent in the capitalist realism types.

 

[Gori the Grey]

We have answer to the first bit:

So now we will, gradually, get an answer to the question in your thread title.

I'm going to start following this case closely.

I go into it with some of the caution in Zard's most recent post: a lot of times the situation is such a mess that it scarcely seems to matter what govt takes power; the pre-existing problems boggle anyone who tries to address them.

We should set metrics for success in advance, and determine the point at which we will take a measure of success How long is his term?

 

[sophie]

Cuba has far and away the most expansive and progressive family and pro-lgbt policy in the world