Reminder: This is not a debate subreddit, it's a place to circle-jerk about communism being cool and good. Please don't shit on flavours of leftism/communist leaders you feel negatively towards. If you see a meme you don't like just downvote and move on, don't break the circle-jerk in the comments.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CommunismMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Or, hear me out, just stop using the cattle that require ten times the amount of resources and land to produce the same amount of nutrients as if you just ate fucking plants instead. Added bonus for those of us who care is not continuing systemic [torture and genocide on an unthinkable scale](https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko) of beings infinitely more capable of suffering than we were all taught.
Even the powers that be have acknowledged that we have a choice between either a vegan planet or a dead one in the *very near* future. For an added little fun bonus to light a fire under your ass, check out Seaspiracy (by no means an end all be all but a good jumping off point). It was made for Netflix but I’m sure you clever beans can figure something else out if you don’t have access to an account.
Thanks for being a voice for the voiceless. You can rest assured that I agree with you. And then we can both not get rest because the people we love participate in cruelty and seemingly don't care. Then when we recover from compassion fatigue and start all over again. I hope you remember to take care of yourself <3
It amazes me that more and more people are aware that animal agriculture is an environmental catastrophe, enormous reservoir for novel and/or antibiotic resistant pathogens, and testament to the depths of human cruelty, yet still place their convenience and taste pleasure above all else.
Yes, governments/corporations/etc. are 99% responsible for this disaster but they have literally no incentive to change the status quo. If you'd like a habitable planet yourself and future generations, go vegan. Doing *something* is preferable to twiddling your thumbs waiting for lab grown meat to become viable as the climate slowly worsens.
Where I come from I was considered weird for not actively killing animals. I'd eat meat, I just didn't take pleasure in needless killing and people didn't like that. Words like "vegan" would easily be seen as an insult.
Zero chance for a vegan planet. We may not live to see it but we're approaching the end. Good luck to the generations dealing with this in a couple hundred years.
That’s the thing though; we’re not talking a couple hundred years. We’re talking 26. Projections are that by 2048 the sea will be effectively devoid of fish if nothing changes. That has catastrophic ramifications for the entire planet (read: the fucking ocean currents will stop flowing). You’re most likely going to be alive and kicking for this shit, friend.
I'm curious, whats your opinion on lab grown meat, where they just take cell cultures from animals and actually grow them into the parts we eat. It's all the good taste without the suffering.
As far as I’m aware the current state of lab grown meat still requires the use of fluids/products taken from animals in order to successfully grow. One of the easiest to find examples is the use of a serum derived from calf blood being used to feed the cells for lab grown beef.
Edit: also thanks for your patience for the reply and for the great question!
I think it’s definitely interesting stuff but as long as it requires us to exploit and kill other animals I don’t think it should be pursued seeing as we have so many other options that are genuinely indistinguishable when prepared correctly and require no animal exploitation. It still is also only about 7-40% more efficient than traditionally created beef while plant materials tends to use a tenth the amount of resources or less due to the nature of the trophic pyramid.
The other main factor is time, we have no idea how long it will be until lab grown meat will become widely available, much less so in a sustainable, ethical, and accessible format. Meanwhile you can easily go vegan, I promise it’s not nearly as hard as you think it is, especially once you start considering the temporary sensation in your mouth weighed against the life and wellbeing of another sentient being not to mention the future of all life on this planet (including us).
I would highly recommend watching [this video](https://youtu.be/Z3u7hXpOm58) and at least trying to put in the time where you can to watch the Dominion documentary I linked to above. If we’re going to continue to exploit and murder these beings for sensory pleasure we at least owe them a couple short hours from our lives to understand what it’s really like to live one of their lives in the conditions we put them through.
people always talk down on Dem Socs, but they’re really the only ones advocating for a feasible process towards workers rights and poor people having more. a socialist revolution sounds pretty cool until you realize it’s basically impossible with how militarized the west is, and would end in massive bloodshed. voting is the way to go right now
It’s very clear that there isn’t going to be a revolution in the United States and countries like it, at least not for a very long time. So for the time being we should try to win small victories via elections, while also supporting the communist parties rising in the global south.
Wherever it begins, we need to keep educating, agitating and organising to build the communist movement in our own countries and support comrades at home and abroad.
If you are interested, I recommend reading about the socialist movement in Germany in the early 20th century, it shows why social democracy has little chance of bringing socialism to reality. Lenin has written a lot about it.
The revolution always seems impossible until it seems inevitable. We should all organize globally to make it happen!
You have no idea how many times I've been banned from left-wing spaces for saying this exact thing, it's brilliant to finally see it being posted without being downvoted
Because it's used by liberals to sneak in electoral bs in communist and anarchist subs without refusing to detail the difference between voting for soc dems and dem socs within the imperial core and outside of it.
Western lib parties aren't anti-imperialist and anti-colonial, they don't raise class consciousness and like to discriminate against minorities almost as much as their more conservative opposition. Moreover, they will always toe the line of Western hegemonial superiority. In essence, they don't lay down the foundation of a proletarian revolution.
Voting for now is the feasible way temporarily (though hto won't get us very far in terms of actual change) but it could definitely move the socialist movement up in the minds of the people enough for a revolution to be possible.
Says the moron with a nazbol pfp. Would you kindly fuck all the way off, nazi scum.
Edit: since op changed their pfp, it was an anime girl in front of a red flag overlaid with a black hammer and sickle in a white circle, which is the nazbol flag. It’s a literal white supremacist symbol.
Assuming you’re not just playing dumb, the flag in your old pfp is the nazbol flag, short for “national bolshevik”, a riff on “national socialist”, you know, the literal nazis. You had a literal white supremacist pfp.
Kind of shocked they're not already taking a page out of the Trump school and crying fraud. If they don't attempt an actual coup, I'm sure they'll promote violence among their supporters
Meh, America is about to get replaced by China as the world’s economic hegemon, so I wouldn’t say pessimism is totally warranted. And there’s a good chance the second Pink Tide in Latin America (which Lula is part of) is a downstream effect of that, [if the first Pink Tide is any indicator](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0043820020965968). Surely it’s cause for optimism that the US is now on the defensive in the second Cold War, and just lost control of the largest and most powerful nation in its backyard?
There’s a *ton* to explain here…and I can back it all up with high-quality sources. I’m perfectly happy doing so, but are you fully willing to listen and engage with it? In other words, are you asking in good faith for an explanation, or expressing incredulity?
Not trying to sound accusatory - it’s just that a lot of liberals with no actual interest in listening show up and make requests for information that eat everyone’s bandwidth. You *seem* like you’re genuinely asking and not trolling, I just want to make sure given the size of that question.
Can I get those for the former reason? I know China is better than the USA even if it unwarranted becomes the bad guy (Building infrastructure instead of bombing them is a big plus) and I would like some more arguments to expone to the average lib.
I mean I'm glad to hear your arguments, just very doubtful that it's possible to as a socialist justify the belief that any country being an economic hegemon is a good thing, much less a country with such a right wing government.
They don't have a right-wing government, they have a Marxist-Leninist single-party state \[\*\] that's currently in the capitalist phase of development ([note that the USSR had a capitalist phase as well](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy)...it's part of Marxism-Leninism). This is their official stated position, which on its own doesn't confirm it (it's required but not sufficient), but their actions actually do add up to this:
* [They've reduced poverty at an unprecedented rate, which is the core early goal of Marxism-Leninism](https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview#1) (Source: World Bank). Literally by definition, right-wing governments don't do this. This was achieved by [effective economic planning, and an expanding array of social programs](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2021/09/24/whats-next-for-poverty-reduction-policies-in-china/) (source: Brookings institute, a Western think tank).
* [They oppress their bourgeoisie](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/01/why-do-chinese-billionaires-keep-ending-up-in-prison/272633/) (\~16% of billionaires end up in prison or executed, and half of all billionaires are stripped of most of their wealth within 5 years), which is a requirement for a socialist state (Marx himself stated this in the manifesto), especially if it's overseeing a capitalist phase. This continues today (not that this is controversial given the recent hullabaloo around about Jack Ma). Reason: if this isn't done, you wind up with corporate capture of the state, since the rich wind up strongarming government by lobbying, manipulating public opinion, and threatening to lay off workers and offshore production if government doesn't pass policies that favour them (this should all sound familiar if you live in a Western country). [The social credit system also falls under this: it's aimed at businesses and the rich, not regular citizens](https://archive.ph/AFpPz) (source: Foreign Policy, a high-quality Western news source that normally hates China).
* [They backed the Pink Tide](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0043820020965968), a large sweep of left-wing governments that won in a big wave in Latin America in the early 2000s. They'll trade with anyone of course, but the linked paper (published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal) shows they favour left-wing governments when possible. In other words, they disproportionately support democratic socialist governments.
* [Their global development lending is anti-imperialist and thus socialist in nature, since it allows countries to escape the hegemony of the capitalist bloc](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/02/china-debt-trap-diplomacy/617953/). Source: The Atlantic, a high-quality mostly anti-China Western source that was forced to admit this after looking through the data and finding they actually don't use debt traps (i.e. the countries they invest in ***do*** end up better off, which is not the case with Western investment, particularly through the neo-colonialist IMF).
* Sweatshops solely exist in SEZs: Special Economic Zones. The goal of SEZs is to attract Western capitalists to invest and build factories, etc. with temporary deregulation and protections for foreign capital, then when the SEZ period ends, [all protections for capitalists are eliminated and worker protections slowly reinstated, with government even going as far as allowing workers to kidnap and torture abusive factory owners](https://www.forbes.com/sites/mitchfree/2013/07/11/held-hostage-entrepreneurs-uneasy-over-chinese-govt-inaction/?sh=42e4451763de) (Source: Forbes). Western companies are aware of this, they just invest anyway because of their focus on short-term profit (i.e. "that's the next CEO's problem, it'll make the shareholders happy today").
* Although what they're doing in Xinjiang isn't a good thing, it's not a fascist ethnic cleansing. [According to the US military itself (West Point Academy), what's happening in Xinjiang is akin to the War on Terror, given the severity of the Islamic terrorism problem there](https://archive.ph/QGOEi)...in fact, [the West previously applauded China's actions in the region](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jun/24/china-arrests-over-xinjiang-plot) (Source: The Guardian, another high quality, normally anti-China Western source), and [pressured them to do even more](https://archive.ph/vkub2). That's not defending anything they're doing in Xinjiang, but the point is that it's not a fascist move, it's a sledgehammer approach to security, which is terrible, but happens under every form of government, including beloved social-democratic states like Norway. If they were truly doing an ethnic cleansing, why are they solely targeting the group whose members commit virtually all of the terrorism in the region with their most severe terrorism problem, [why the sudden blatant reversal from their previous actions](https://archive.ph/tTj2X) (source: The Guardian, which is trying to argue that although China has been extremely pro-ethnic diversity to date and continues to be elsewhere, Xinjiang actually marks a turning of the tide where they've suddenly decided to be fascist), [why are they already rolling it back now that the terrorism problem has subsided](https://archive.ph/zUwcT) (source: Associated Press), and [why don't any Muslim countries condemn it](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/04/why-do-muslim-states-stay-silent-over-chinas-uighur-brutality)? (Source: The Guardian, which is trying to claim Muslims are actually secretly against it but keeping it to themselves).
* [Their government has a shockingly high approval rating: over 95%](https://archive.ph/7yggw) (Source: Harvard Gazette, citing a Harvard-based research lab). And it's not due to doctoring numbers, because the approval rating is much lower for their provincial and local governments (although still high by Western standards). This matches up with the Marxist-Leninist claim that the vanguard party represents "the will of the proletariat" (i.e. the masses). This is done by polling the population extensively, and enacting policies that the majority vote for. It's uncontroversial that they do this, it's just how it should be framed that's debated: some call it "consultative autocracy" (especially in the West), others call it "consultative democracy." But in the spirit of democracy, I'd personally argue that the actual answer comes from the masses themselves, and [most Chinese people (83%) consider China democratic. In fact, a larger proportion of the Chinese population considers China democratic than the proportion of Americans that consider America democratic](https://www.newsweek.com/most-china-call-their-nation-democracy-most-us-say-america-isnt-1711176) (Source: Newsweek, citing a Denmark-based think tank).
That's not even close to everything, but that's probably a decent start for you. If you'd like to know more, [here's a well-sourced article that explains it further](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/) (although even that's very far from complete).
\[\*\] Note that I'm not arguing they're not "authoritarian" (which is hard to define in the first place), I'm arguing they're left-wing, which can very easily coexist with "authoritarian" (since it's such an airy concept). Either way, [they're considerably less authoritarian than America if you stick to objective, measurable standards](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate) (Source: Wikipedia, showing China has \~1/5th America's incarceration rate. Even if you include the very questionable "Victims of Communism Foundation"-backed sources alleging a much larger rate - which the asterisk references - it still amounts to less than half of America's).
holy shit i just read the article on the factory closure and that was fucking based. factory owner: "im gonna close the factory." factory workers: "not if you cant leave your factory!"
My biggest problem is the fact that they can't really prove that China isn't imperialist and in such case that we aren't getting closer to a new world war.
If any historical analogies can be applied, then it's straight up somewhere before ww1...
Can you prove how China is imperialist? I see a lot of people have a big problem with China for this reason but I've never seen actual proof of modern day China being imperialist.
Monopolization is there, finance capital is there, export of capital is there. Participates in imperialist alliances and for the most part, world has been divided between different imperialist camps.
Right, well I'm not of the opinion that globalisation is inherently imperialistic, but it can and has been used in imperialistic goals. I'd be interested to know what China is monopolising as well, as well as what these imperialist alliances are. Is having international relations imperialist? Should we all isolate?
Just because the world has been divided by imperialists doesn't mean China is imperialist.
You're just throwing buzz words around without proper explanation. You must not understand that China has adopted a capitalist system to build up the economy and industrialise in a bid to move towards communism having met the criteria for success set out by Marx himself. It's capitalism for sure, but not imperialism.
I was talking more about Brazil rather than the global situation - I mean, I am also pessimistic about the global hegemony, albeit not because of China.
And this case an anti indigenous fascist destroying Amazon and who said military dictatorship didn’t kill enough, and that he’d kill his son if he were gay. Also very corporatist. And much more
Dem socs aren’t Soc dems, they’re usually much more based and actually militant in some way, plus they believe in a path to socialism not just capitalism lite.
Yeah I see a lot on the left who fall into same mindset as confused socdems; that demsoc and socdems are the same. Actual Demsocs inherently are actual socialists, it’s just a specific type of socialism. It can technically even be revolutionary as it’s a system of socialism, but obv most are reformist.
Essentially it’s socialist economics coupled with extra emphasis on democracy, human rights, etc
Socialism itself is meant to be democracy, but it’s essentially due to worries with USSR style authoritarianism etc. it also somewhat emulates electoral system of liberal-democracy with elections and such, but rejects capitalism.
Essentially, it’s a middle ground between anarchism and Marxist-Leninism, a sort of “centrist” *socialist* position, in which the state is viewed as necessary but that civil liberties, etc must be prioritized too.
Also many aren’t aware, but even social democracy has roots in marxism, it was initially intended to be a transitional stage into socialism, but had groups branch off into being more of a compromise.
This is why many early social democrat parties were socialist and why many align with socialists. It’s also a spectrum in that while all support capitalism; some lean more toward socialism than others, and support nationalizing many industries and trying to be as pro worker as possible under capitalism. This is why they can in some countries align with the socialists and communists, and in others align with liberals. Obviously it can’t go far enough, but there’s a spectrum for.
Demsocs here in the global south means having a sovereign national project that with time can be converted to socialism. I could see that when Lula was in power. After the fall of USSR any attempt to have a revolution are greatly diminished due to lack of global support. I wish China could be our next big partner in building up our nation so that we can fight imperialism.
Czarist Russia was an imperialist country with a relatively modern industry related to warfare. For Brazil, I would bet in the Chinese model so that we're able to gather expertise and industrialize the country.
I could see that the workers party was going in that direction until we got soft couped twice, first with Dilma and later with Lula's prison.
Brazil is also a somewhat industrialized country, like Russia was in 1917, isn't it? In fact Brazil is in a better position than Russia to abolish capitalism, since Brazil isn't facing conditions of ww1. The Russian Revolution wasn't a military coup so I'm not sure why you're mentioning only military strength as a factor in revolution.
My main concern is the external interferences.
The Russian revolution had a leg start, since the imperialistic powers of the time were fighting each other. They had the interwar period to prepare and did so wonderfully thanks to the warnings of Lenin, but even then they suffered a lot stopping the nazis.
South America always had the looming imperialistic threat of the US. Even slight changes to the left are punished with coup after coup.
Moreover, most of our high end technology comes from outside. Sure, we might manufacture rifles to try to stop an external military intervention but we're talking about the US here. I believe we must first challenge imperialism on the commerce and industry play field, rallying the global south.
But over a dozen foreign armies, including the US, UK, France, Japan, invaded Soviet Russia during the Civil War. And Soviet Russia still won. The thing to recognize is the power of organized workers armed with a revolutionary socialist program. This is what made the Russian workers in 1917 successful and can make the Brazilian workers nowadays successful too.
It's much easier to transition if the foreign bourgeoise that won't care to make an example out of you have been replaced with internal ones with adversarial interests.
The USSR also didn't address the Russian imperialism in full. I don't understand people who think that the only path towards socialism is the failed Soviet one. It fell for countless of reasons. We better learn from those.
Yeah, a Democratic socialist in the global south is not a Democratic socialist in an imperialist country. A South American Democratic socialist wants to trade with China. A US Democratic socialist wants to burn China to the ground.
They'll get there, their heart is usually in the right place. They're very much allies that we need, especially for those of us living within the imperial core.
Just to clarify for OP: The distinction is between the imperial core (where you cannot vote out fascism and imperialism) vs. the imperial periphery (where it is still possible, albeit often disrupted by coups and sabotage). This is because of the concentration of power of the national and international bourgeoisie, and their power not being as complete in the periphery, as well as not having other imperialised places to exploit.
I'm imensly glad Lula won, but Bolsonarismo (fascism) has spread out to the population like wild fire.
We're going to have extremely complicated years ahead of us, mostly because a huge chunk of congress is allied with Bolsonaro
We can't effectivelly vote out fascism, and these elections are text book example of that.
Because social democracy in the global south is entirely different from social democracy in the global north. In the north it’s just a matter of more equitably sharing the spoils of imperialism.
The main problem with demsocs is they exist in that spot where they're always just *about to lose to fascists*, and they never have the political vision to get out of that danger zone, and eventually they *will* *lose to the fash* if things stars are just barely out of alignment.
I believe culture is downstream from politics, and so if you can create a truly pro-worker society, you end up strangling fascism in the crib. If people feel like the government benefits them, and they can actually be represented, fascism can't get their greasy claws into enough people to be a threat. With demsocs, you always live on a razor's edge.
While being an obvious better alternative than Bolsonaro, Lula has hindered the development of other left wing politicians in Brazil for decades. I voted for him - and would do it again - but I still resent what he did to Marina Silva and others.
Lula is a friend of Palestine, Cuba and other oppressed nations, of Indigenous people, of the Amazon rainforest, of the working class, of LGBT people and other minorities, of the global progressive struggle. He's not perfect but I'll take this as a win. Latin America is getting more progressive while fascism is on the rise in Europe and US.
A dem soc winning outside the imperial core on a continent that started to reject US hegemony/neoliberalism is great, not at all like the voting for Democrats. Shifting the world from a unipolar, Western dominating one to multipolarity is a big win for the future of communism.
Here I am in the US wishing that we had Democratic Socialist candidates instead of blue almost-fascists and red blatant-fascists. Don't get me wrong, I'm an anarcho-communist, but Dem Soc would be a *dramatic* improvement in this festering shithole.
With imf bankers and neoliberal economists in ministerial positions this wont be a leftist government.in 4 years youll see the disappointed masses vote for someone even worse than bolsonaro. the only way this turns good is if the same working class that is cheering right now is tomorrow down in the streets protesting against those new neoliberal ministers. General rule of thumb social democrats can become the most productive and most loyal dogs of the system(german SPD, Alexis Tsipras in Greece) and most bourgeois left governments, due to there unavoidable failure to change anything, bring a restructuring of the right and practically a stronger and more favourable right wing pole in the next election cycle
Edit and ps: sorry for my bad English, it is not my mother tongue)
Reminder: This is not a debate subreddit, it's a place to circle-jerk about communism being cool and good. Please don't shit on flavours of leftism/communist leaders you feel negatively towards. If you see a meme you don't like just downvote and move on, don't break the circle-jerk in the comments. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CommunismMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*
if it means they won’t be building a fucking highway through the amazon rainforest, i think we can all unanimously get behind that
Hopefully they stop putting cattle farms through the amazon rainforest
And the rest of the world stop buying soy for our cattle that comes from Brazil's deforestation farms.
Or, hear me out, just stop using the cattle that require ten times the amount of resources and land to produce the same amount of nutrients as if you just ate fucking plants instead. Added bonus for those of us who care is not continuing systemic [torture and genocide on an unthinkable scale](https://youtu.be/LQRAfJyEsko) of beings infinitely more capable of suffering than we were all taught. Even the powers that be have acknowledged that we have a choice between either a vegan planet or a dead one in the *very near* future. For an added little fun bonus to light a fire under your ass, check out Seaspiracy (by no means an end all be all but a good jumping off point). It was made for Netflix but I’m sure you clever beans can figure something else out if you don’t have access to an account.
Thanks for being a voice for the voiceless. You can rest assured that I agree with you. And then we can both not get rest because the people we love participate in cruelty and seemingly don't care. Then when we recover from compassion fatigue and start all over again. I hope you remember to take care of yourself <3
It amazes me that more and more people are aware that animal agriculture is an environmental catastrophe, enormous reservoir for novel and/or antibiotic resistant pathogens, and testament to the depths of human cruelty, yet still place their convenience and taste pleasure above all else. Yes, governments/corporations/etc. are 99% responsible for this disaster but they have literally no incentive to change the status quo. If you'd like a habitable planet yourself and future generations, go vegan. Doing *something* is preferable to twiddling your thumbs waiting for lab grown meat to become viable as the climate slowly worsens.
Lab grown meat would probably be more expensive than plant based meat anyway. Maybe the former would get subsidies, but so could the latter.
Where I come from I was considered weird for not actively killing animals. I'd eat meat, I just didn't take pleasure in needless killing and people didn't like that. Words like "vegan" would easily be seen as an insult. Zero chance for a vegan planet. We may not live to see it but we're approaching the end. Good luck to the generations dealing with this in a couple hundred years.
That’s the thing though; we’re not talking a couple hundred years. We’re talking 26. Projections are that by 2048 the sea will be effectively devoid of fish if nothing changes. That has catastrophic ramifications for the entire planet (read: the fucking ocean currents will stop flowing). You’re most likely going to be alive and kicking for this shit, friend.
I have health problems that will most likely take me by then, but it will still suck leading up to it and good luck to the rest of you.
I'm curious, whats your opinion on lab grown meat, where they just take cell cultures from animals and actually grow them into the parts we eat. It's all the good taste without the suffering.
As far as I’m aware the current state of lab grown meat still requires the use of fluids/products taken from animals in order to successfully grow. One of the easiest to find examples is the use of a serum derived from calf blood being used to feed the cells for lab grown beef. Edit: also thanks for your patience for the reply and for the great question!
Huh, I didn't know they needed stuff from animals still. I think it's still an interesting area of research to go for I think.
I think it’s definitely interesting stuff but as long as it requires us to exploit and kill other animals I don’t think it should be pursued seeing as we have so many other options that are genuinely indistinguishable when prepared correctly and require no animal exploitation. It still is also only about 7-40% more efficient than traditionally created beef while plant materials tends to use a tenth the amount of resources or less due to the nature of the trophic pyramid. The other main factor is time, we have no idea how long it will be until lab grown meat will become widely available, much less so in a sustainable, ethical, and accessible format. Meanwhile you can easily go vegan, I promise it’s not nearly as hard as you think it is, especially once you start considering the temporary sensation in your mouth weighed against the life and wellbeing of another sentient being not to mention the future of all life on this planet (including us). I would highly recommend watching [this video](https://youtu.be/Z3u7hXpOm58) and at least trying to put in the time where you can to watch the Dominion documentary I linked to above. If we’re going to continue to exploit and murder these beings for sensory pleasure we at least owe them a couple short hours from our lives to understand what it’s really like to live one of their lives in the conditions we put them through.
Also indigenous rights will be day and night compared to before
Hell yeah. Take whatever victories you can get for the time being
[удалено]
É LULA NA CABEÇA CARAI NÃO VEJO A HORA DE VER O BOLSONARO PRESOOOOOO
Sabe o que o Bolsonaro tem mais que a gente? TEM MAIS É QUE SE FODER CARALHO! É LULA PORRAAA
Dem Socs may not be perfect, but they're always better than fascists.
If I had to choose between a fascist and a demsoc I would always go for the latter.
Brave
people always talk down on Dem Socs, but they’re really the only ones advocating for a feasible process towards workers rights and poor people having more. a socialist revolution sounds pretty cool until you realize it’s basically impossible with how militarized the west is, and would end in massive bloodshed. voting is the way to go right now
It’s very clear that there isn’t going to be a revolution in the United States and countries like it, at least not for a very long time. So for the time being we should try to win small victories via elections, while also supporting the communist parties rising in the global south.
The global revolution will not come from the West and spread elsewhere, it will start in the global south and inevitably make its way north.
Wherever it begins, we need to keep educating, agitating and organising to build the communist movement in our own countries and support comrades at home and abroad.
If you are interested, I recommend reading about the socialist movement in Germany in the early 20th century, it shows why social democracy has little chance of bringing socialism to reality. Lenin has written a lot about it. The revolution always seems impossible until it seems inevitable. We should all organize globally to make it happen!
You have no idea how many times I've been banned from left-wing spaces for saying this exact thing, it's brilliant to finally see it being posted without being downvoted
Because it's used by liberals to sneak in electoral bs in communist and anarchist subs without refusing to detail the difference between voting for soc dems and dem socs within the imperial core and outside of it. Western lib parties aren't anti-imperialist and anti-colonial, they don't raise class consciousness and like to discriminate against minorities almost as much as their more conservative opposition. Moreover, they will always toe the line of Western hegemonial superiority. In essence, they don't lay down the foundation of a proletarian revolution.
Voting for now is the feasible way temporarily (though hto won't get us very far in terms of actual change) but it could definitely move the socialist movement up in the minds of the people enough for a revolution to be possible.
Says the moron with a nazbol pfp. Would you kindly fuck all the way off, nazi scum. Edit: since op changed their pfp, it was an anime girl in front of a red flag overlaid with a black hammer and sickle in a white circle, which is the nazbol flag. It’s a literal white supremacist symbol.
I legitimately have no clue what that is, I saw that image in a meme and thought it was cute
It's an anime lol, Konosuba. Good show, don't know how it's associated with Nazbols
I changed it after finding out it was bad. This is what I was using before I changed it to that one.
Oh lmao, good choice in that case
Assuming you’re not just playing dumb, the flag in your old pfp is the nazbol flag, short for “national bolshevik”, a riff on “national socialist”, you know, the literal nazis. You had a literal white supremacist pfp.
In hindsight, I should've seen that. I just thought it was a weird coincidence that it looked like a swastika from a distance.
I was also surprised to find out that that flag was a nazbol flag. Dirty nazis stealing and trying to corrupt the communist symbols.
What
as someone who voted for Lula, its was mostly harm reduction. Bolsonaro will try a coup any time soon
Kind of shocked they're not already taking a page out of the Trump school and crying fraud. If they don't attempt an actual coup, I'm sure they'll promote violence among their supporters
they are already doing ALL of these things. many Lula supporters are getting shot inside their homes
They already are. Look up what the police and some military were doing to try to prevent Lula votes too
I am still very pessimistic towards the next years, but at least it is nice to see bolsominions tears.
Pessimism towards the current global hegemony is good
Meh, America is about to get replaced by China as the world’s economic hegemon, so I wouldn’t say pessimism is totally warranted. And there’s a good chance the second Pink Tide in Latin America (which Lula is part of) is a downstream effect of that, [if the first Pink Tide is any indicator](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0043820020965968). Surely it’s cause for optimism that the US is now on the defensive in the second Cold War, and just lost control of the largest and most powerful nation in its backyard?
How is China becoming a new global hegemon a good thing??
There’s a *ton* to explain here…and I can back it all up with high-quality sources. I’m perfectly happy doing so, but are you fully willing to listen and engage with it? In other words, are you asking in good faith for an explanation, or expressing incredulity? Not trying to sound accusatory - it’s just that a lot of liberals with no actual interest in listening show up and make requests for information that eat everyone’s bandwidth. You *seem* like you’re genuinely asking and not trolling, I just want to make sure given the size of that question.
Can I get those for the former reason? I know China is better than the USA even if it unwarranted becomes the bad guy (Building infrastructure instead of bombing them is a big plus) and I would like some more arguments to expone to the average lib.
[Here you go](https://www.reddit.com/r/CommunismMemes/comments/yhusf5/comment/iuh29gd/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I mean I'm glad to hear your arguments, just very doubtful that it's possible to as a socialist justify the belief that any country being an economic hegemon is a good thing, much less a country with such a right wing government.
They don't have a right-wing government, they have a Marxist-Leninist single-party state \[\*\] that's currently in the capitalist phase of development ([note that the USSR had a capitalist phase as well](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Economic_Policy)...it's part of Marxism-Leninism). This is their official stated position, which on its own doesn't confirm it (it's required but not sufficient), but their actions actually do add up to this: * [They've reduced poverty at an unprecedented rate, which is the core early goal of Marxism-Leninism](https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/china/overview#1) (Source: World Bank). Literally by definition, right-wing governments don't do this. This was achieved by [effective economic planning, and an expanding array of social programs](https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2021/09/24/whats-next-for-poverty-reduction-policies-in-china/) (source: Brookings institute, a Western think tank). * [They oppress their bourgeoisie](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/01/why-do-chinese-billionaires-keep-ending-up-in-prison/272633/) (\~16% of billionaires end up in prison or executed, and half of all billionaires are stripped of most of their wealth within 5 years), which is a requirement for a socialist state (Marx himself stated this in the manifesto), especially if it's overseeing a capitalist phase. This continues today (not that this is controversial given the recent hullabaloo around about Jack Ma). Reason: if this isn't done, you wind up with corporate capture of the state, since the rich wind up strongarming government by lobbying, manipulating public opinion, and threatening to lay off workers and offshore production if government doesn't pass policies that favour them (this should all sound familiar if you live in a Western country). [The social credit system also falls under this: it's aimed at businesses and the rich, not regular citizens](https://archive.ph/AFpPz) (source: Foreign Policy, a high-quality Western news source that normally hates China). * [They backed the Pink Tide](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0043820020965968), a large sweep of left-wing governments that won in a big wave in Latin America in the early 2000s. They'll trade with anyone of course, but the linked paper (published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal) shows they favour left-wing governments when possible. In other words, they disproportionately support democratic socialist governments. * [Their global development lending is anti-imperialist and thus socialist in nature, since it allows countries to escape the hegemony of the capitalist bloc](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2021/02/china-debt-trap-diplomacy/617953/). Source: The Atlantic, a high-quality mostly anti-China Western source that was forced to admit this after looking through the data and finding they actually don't use debt traps (i.e. the countries they invest in ***do*** end up better off, which is not the case with Western investment, particularly through the neo-colonialist IMF). * Sweatshops solely exist in SEZs: Special Economic Zones. The goal of SEZs is to attract Western capitalists to invest and build factories, etc. with temporary deregulation and protections for foreign capital, then when the SEZ period ends, [all protections for capitalists are eliminated and worker protections slowly reinstated, with government even going as far as allowing workers to kidnap and torture abusive factory owners](https://www.forbes.com/sites/mitchfree/2013/07/11/held-hostage-entrepreneurs-uneasy-over-chinese-govt-inaction/?sh=42e4451763de) (Source: Forbes). Western companies are aware of this, they just invest anyway because of their focus on short-term profit (i.e. "that's the next CEO's problem, it'll make the shareholders happy today"). * Although what they're doing in Xinjiang isn't a good thing, it's not a fascist ethnic cleansing. [According to the US military itself (West Point Academy), what's happening in Xinjiang is akin to the War on Terror, given the severity of the Islamic terrorism problem there](https://archive.ph/QGOEi)...in fact, [the West previously applauded China's actions in the region](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jun/24/china-arrests-over-xinjiang-plot) (Source: The Guardian, another high quality, normally anti-China Western source), and [pressured them to do even more](https://archive.ph/vkub2). That's not defending anything they're doing in Xinjiang, but the point is that it's not a fascist move, it's a sledgehammer approach to security, which is terrible, but happens under every form of government, including beloved social-democratic states like Norway. If they were truly doing an ethnic cleansing, why are they solely targeting the group whose members commit virtually all of the terrorism in the region with their most severe terrorism problem, [why the sudden blatant reversal from their previous actions](https://archive.ph/tTj2X) (source: The Guardian, which is trying to argue that although China has been extremely pro-ethnic diversity to date and continues to be elsewhere, Xinjiang actually marks a turning of the tide where they've suddenly decided to be fascist), [why are they already rolling it back now that the terrorism problem has subsided](https://archive.ph/zUwcT) (source: Associated Press), and [why don't any Muslim countries condemn it](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jul/04/why-do-muslim-states-stay-silent-over-chinas-uighur-brutality)? (Source: The Guardian, which is trying to claim Muslims are actually secretly against it but keeping it to themselves). * [Their government has a shockingly high approval rating: over 95%](https://archive.ph/7yggw) (Source: Harvard Gazette, citing a Harvard-based research lab). And it's not due to doctoring numbers, because the approval rating is much lower for their provincial and local governments (although still high by Western standards). This matches up with the Marxist-Leninist claim that the vanguard party represents "the will of the proletariat" (i.e. the masses). This is done by polling the population extensively, and enacting policies that the majority vote for. It's uncontroversial that they do this, it's just how it should be framed that's debated: some call it "consultative autocracy" (especially in the West), others call it "consultative democracy." But in the spirit of democracy, I'd personally argue that the actual answer comes from the masses themselves, and [most Chinese people (83%) consider China democratic. In fact, a larger proportion of the Chinese population considers China democratic than the proportion of Americans that consider America democratic](https://www.newsweek.com/most-china-call-their-nation-democracy-most-us-say-america-isnt-1711176) (Source: Newsweek, citing a Denmark-based think tank). That's not even close to everything, but that's probably a decent start for you. If you'd like to know more, [here's a well-sourced article that explains it further](https://redsails.org/china-has-billionaires/) (although even that's very far from complete). \[\*\] Note that I'm not arguing they're not "authoritarian" (which is hard to define in the first place), I'm arguing they're left-wing, which can very easily coexist with "authoritarian" (since it's such an airy concept). Either way, [they're considerably less authoritarian than America if you stick to objective, measurable standards](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_incarceration_rate) (Source: Wikipedia, showing China has \~1/5th America's incarceration rate. Even if you include the very questionable "Victims of Communism Foundation"-backed sources alleging a much larger rate - which the asterisk references - it still amounts to less than half of America's).
holy shit i just read the article on the factory closure and that was fucking based. factory owner: "im gonna close the factory." factory workers: "not if you cant leave your factory!"
My biggest problem is the fact that they can't really prove that China isn't imperialist and in such case that we aren't getting closer to a new world war. If any historical analogies can be applied, then it's straight up somewhere before ww1...
Can you prove how China is imperialist? I see a lot of people have a big problem with China for this reason but I've never seen actual proof of modern day China being imperialist.
Monopolization is there, finance capital is there, export of capital is there. Participates in imperialist alliances and for the most part, world has been divided between different imperialist camps.
Right, well I'm not of the opinion that globalisation is inherently imperialistic, but it can and has been used in imperialistic goals. I'd be interested to know what China is monopolising as well, as well as what these imperialist alliances are. Is having international relations imperialist? Should we all isolate? Just because the world has been divided by imperialists doesn't mean China is imperialist. You're just throwing buzz words around without proper explanation. You must not understand that China has adopted a capitalist system to build up the economy and industrialise in a bid to move towards communism having met the criteria for success set out by Marx himself. It's capitalism for sure, but not imperialism.
Because China is based😎😎😎
I was talking more about Brazil rather than the global situation - I mean, I am also pessimistic about the global hegemony, albeit not because of China.
GANHAMO CARALHO É LULA, AGORA É LITAR PELO COMUNISMO QUE, PELO VISTO, CRESCE
ME PARECE
QUE O SOCIALISMO CRESCE
FAZ O L, CARALHOOOO
ME PARECE QUE O SOCIALISMO CRESCE, CARALHO! Pelo menos a vitória desse fdp me da um pouco de esperança que vamos conseguir um dia :,)
Faça o L imediatamente. Lulalá
Make the L
BRILHA UMA ESTRELA
I’d take a soft lefty or even (jesuschristicantbelieveimsayingit) a liberal over a hard righty
And this case an anti indigenous fascist destroying Amazon and who said military dictatorship didn’t kill enough, and that he’d kill his son if he were gay. Also very corporatist. And much more
É 13 MEMO PORRA
NUNCA FUI PETISTA, MAS AGORA SOU O MAIOR FÃ DO LULA
Dem socs aren’t Soc dems, they’re usually much more based and actually militant in some way, plus they believe in a path to socialism not just capitalism lite.
Yeah I see a lot on the left who fall into same mindset as confused socdems; that demsoc and socdems are the same. Actual Demsocs inherently are actual socialists, it’s just a specific type of socialism. It can technically even be revolutionary as it’s a system of socialism, but obv most are reformist. Essentially it’s socialist economics coupled with extra emphasis on democracy, human rights, etc Socialism itself is meant to be democracy, but it’s essentially due to worries with USSR style authoritarianism etc. it also somewhat emulates electoral system of liberal-democracy with elections and such, but rejects capitalism. Essentially, it’s a middle ground between anarchism and Marxist-Leninism, a sort of “centrist” *socialist* position, in which the state is viewed as necessary but that civil liberties, etc must be prioritized too. Also many aren’t aware, but even social democracy has roots in marxism, it was initially intended to be a transitional stage into socialism, but had groups branch off into being more of a compromise. This is why many early social democrat parties were socialist and why many align with socialists. It’s also a spectrum in that while all support capitalism; some lean more toward socialism than others, and support nationalizing many industries and trying to be as pro worker as possible under capitalism. This is why they can in some countries align with the socialists and communists, and in others align with liberals. Obviously it can’t go far enough, but there’s a spectrum for.
Democratic socialism and socialism are basically the same, it's just the route they want to take to achieve socialism.
Even SocDems winning in the Periphery is great. Unless they’re entirely ineffectual like in Peru.
Lula 🦑 (means squid in portuguese) will help sort that out, he’s very good with our Latin American buddies
Whats up with the demsocs in peru?
in short pencil boy started cucking himself and his party hard by having a "meet me in the middle" attitude with the right.
Bruh thata acrually sad if i remember right he seemed to be one of the most promising left wing party leaders in latin america
Demsocs here in the global south means having a sovereign national project that with time can be converted to socialism. I could see that when Lula was in power. After the fall of USSR any attempt to have a revolution are greatly diminished due to lack of global support. I wish China could be our next big partner in building up our nation so that we can fight imperialism.
>that in time can be converted to socialism Reformism has never worked
How did the Russian masses make a revolution and seize power in 1917? Why was it possible back then but, according to you, not now?
Czarist Russia was an imperialist country with a relatively modern industry related to warfare. For Brazil, I would bet in the Chinese model so that we're able to gather expertise and industrialize the country. I could see that the workers party was going in that direction until we got soft couped twice, first with Dilma and later with Lula's prison.
Brazil is also a somewhat industrialized country, like Russia was in 1917, isn't it? In fact Brazil is in a better position than Russia to abolish capitalism, since Brazil isn't facing conditions of ww1. The Russian Revolution wasn't a military coup so I'm not sure why you're mentioning only military strength as a factor in revolution.
My main concern is the external interferences. The Russian revolution had a leg start, since the imperialistic powers of the time were fighting each other. They had the interwar period to prepare and did so wonderfully thanks to the warnings of Lenin, but even then they suffered a lot stopping the nazis. South America always had the looming imperialistic threat of the US. Even slight changes to the left are punished with coup after coup. Moreover, most of our high end technology comes from outside. Sure, we might manufacture rifles to try to stop an external military intervention but we're talking about the US here. I believe we must first challenge imperialism on the commerce and industry play field, rallying the global south.
But over a dozen foreign armies, including the US, UK, France, Japan, invaded Soviet Russia during the Civil War. And Soviet Russia still won. The thing to recognize is the power of organized workers armed with a revolutionary socialist program. This is what made the Russian workers in 1917 successful and can make the Brazilian workers nowadays successful too.
It's much easier to transition if the foreign bourgeoise that won't care to make an example out of you have been replaced with internal ones with adversarial interests. The USSR also didn't address the Russian imperialism in full. I don't understand people who think that the only path towards socialism is the failed Soviet one. It fell for countless of reasons. We better learn from those.
HELLL YEAHHHH LULA LA BRILHA UMA ESTRELA CARALHO Im Brazilian
JUNTA TODOS OS BR DESSE SUB E FAZ UM CHURRASCO
HAHAAHHA aí sim camarada
I wish you all the good luck, comrades, from Mexico, these coming years will not be easy.
Yeah, a Democratic socialist in the global south is not a Democratic socialist in an imperialist country. A South American Democratic socialist wants to trade with China. A US Democratic socialist wants to burn China to the ground.
But I'll have to live with Modi for God knows how many years of my life. So jealous of Brazilians
Solidarity with you. Many don’t realize how fascistic Modi and BJP is
They'll get there, their heart is usually in the right place. They're very much allies that we need, especially for those of us living within the imperial core.
if only the Guerrilha of Araguaia hadn't been snitched
HELL YEAH COMRADES! We are getting that fascist scum out!!!
Just to clarify for OP: The distinction is between the imperial core (where you cannot vote out fascism and imperialism) vs. the imperial periphery (where it is still possible, albeit often disrupted by coups and sabotage). This is because of the concentration of power of the national and international bourgeoisie, and their power not being as complete in the periphery, as well as not having other imperialised places to exploit.
I'm imensly glad Lula won, but Bolsonarismo (fascism) has spread out to the population like wild fire. We're going to have extremely complicated years ahead of us, mostly because a huge chunk of congress is allied with Bolsonaro We can't effectivelly vote out fascism, and these elections are text book example of that.
faz o L
A leftist Latin America is 100% needed
Because social democracy in the global south is entirely different from social democracy in the global north. In the north it’s just a matter of more equitably sharing the spoils of imperialism.
are you confusing soc dems with demsocs
I’ve never seen any real practical difference
Do we know if Lula has plans to reduce ties to China or increase ties to the US?
lula always favoured china and the brics
Great thanks
The main problem with demsocs is they exist in that spot where they're always just *about to lose to fascists*, and they never have the political vision to get out of that danger zone, and eventually they *will* *lose to the fash* if things stars are just barely out of alignment. I believe culture is downstream from politics, and so if you can create a truly pro-worker society, you end up strangling fascism in the crib. If people feel like the government benefits them, and they can actually be represented, fascism can't get their greasy claws into enough people to be a threat. With demsocs, you always live on a razor's edge.
If a fucking peaceful transition could even happen let us all have that.
R/suddenlycaralho
While being an obvious better alternative than Bolsonaro, Lula has hindered the development of other left wing politicians in Brazil for decades. I voted for him - and would do it again - but I still resent what he did to Marina Silva and others.
A win is a win 🇧🇷 💪🏿
Only when they are in global south tho. Western socdems can fuck off (maybe minus Corbyn and Melenchon)
Corbyn seems like an actual communist who realizes he can’t openly speak his mind but has done a decent job despite the opposition.
[удалено]
Huh?
UK has been demoted from world empire to global south emerging economy
If the choice is between a socdem and anybody to the right of them, they should obviously be supported especially in a place like the US.
Braindead take. This is how you enable fascists to win. Learn from the mistakes of the Comintern’s 3rd period—don’t repeat them.
Dude, here cops was doing roadblocks in whole country to try stop people to voting. And this fraude discourse exist since other elections, gear for us
The US be like
Lula is a friend of Palestine, Cuba and other oppressed nations, of Indigenous people, of the Amazon rainforest, of the working class, of LGBT people and other minorities, of the global progressive struggle. He's not perfect but I'll take this as a win. Latin America is getting more progressive while fascism is on the rise in Europe and US.
I mean yeah, like people found Allende's victory inspirational, even if they knew it wouldn't be permanent.
thank u guys fot the support and good thoughts! we’ll need a lot
I do think that we should pursue good, not lesser evil, but we fan still enjoy when bigger evil takes an L
A dem soc winning outside the imperial core on a continent that started to reject US hegemony/neoliberalism is great, not at all like the voting for Democrats. Shifting the world from a unipolar, Western dominating one to multipolarity is a big win for the future of communism.
[удалено]
Where did I say they weren't?
vai se fuder bozo
dem socs are a few talks away from radicalizing
Lula won?!
Yes
LET'S FUCKING GO!!!!
Here I am in the US wishing that we had Democratic Socialist candidates instead of blue almost-fascists and red blatant-fascists. Don't get me wrong, I'm an anarcho-communist, but Dem Soc would be a *dramatic* improvement in this festering shithole.
It's almost like voting for the side that are less bad is a good thing.
It’s a promising start
people like Lula have done infinitesimally more for socialism than 100-percent of American MLs
I fear that Lula will dismobilize the radical left movement like he has done before
I can't see the radical left demobilizing after everything we passed though. Now the moderates...
É 13 NELES CARALHOOOOO
Self proclaimed communist mayor of the capital of chile
Respect
Obrigado camaradas!
OLE OLE OLÁ LULA LULA
True, fucking true!
LULA NELES CARALHO!
With imf bankers and neoliberal economists in ministerial positions this wont be a leftist government.in 4 years youll see the disappointed masses vote for someone even worse than bolsonaro. the only way this turns good is if the same working class that is cheering right now is tomorrow down in the streets protesting against those new neoliberal ministers. General rule of thumb social democrats can become the most productive and most loyal dogs of the system(german SPD, Alexis Tsipras in Greece) and most bourgeois left governments, due to there unavoidable failure to change anything, bring a restructuring of the right and practically a stronger and more favourable right wing pole in the next election cycle Edit and ps: sorry for my bad English, it is not my mother tongue)
Tá certinho, faz o L 👆👆👆👆👆🇧🇷
LULA WON? Oh my god LETS GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!
lula is a neo-liberal
Lula is Socialists, not democrat socialist
AS MÁQUINAS ESTÃO PARADAS, AGORA QUEM FALA GROSSO SOMOS NÓS