So since I would consider myself a baby ML. I don’t really trust myself in being able to defend the history and the ideology of Marxism Leninism.

after talking with her about the disastrous effects free market policy would have on Cuba . We came to disagree on how much the embargo mattered. she blames that the under productivity and inefficiency of the Cuban economy is due to the restriction of a free market. I tried responding with that the two currency system solves that problem, but now I realize I probably should be knowing more before arguing.

We also discussed the US interest in invading countries that nationalize their oil. She admitted that there was an incentive to invade these countries. then she asked me why Norway with a nationalized oil production hasn’t been invaded. The only answer I came up with was that Norway is part of the US sphere of influence and participates with imperialism alongside the US. but I don’t feel like that’s a good answer.

If anyone could help me with these two topics that would be highly appreciated.

Part 1


Norwegians didn’t commit 9/11 and they aren’t generally brown, not that ‘brown people are all terrorism’ has any validity to it, but it’s still a convincing casus belli for the US government to invade all of the ‘muslim’ countries (that weren’t of course their primary oil trading partner Saudi Arabia). The reason Norway is not invaded is because there is not a strong enough casus belli to justify invading them.


Norway’s oil isn’t entirely nationalized. It has been partly privatized. I did a bit of digging and it seems that the government only owns 67% of Equinor Proof. Seems like Norway is headed in the same direction as Sweden and Finland and is slowly dismantling its social welfare. Albeit at a slower pace, this is probably due to the fact that they aren’t in the EU so they face less pressure, for now at least.

This is probably the main reason, the Nordic states have been compliant with the Imperialist demands. Cuba on the other hand wants to own all the resources of its land and prevent its population from being used as a cheap labor pool by the US. Since they resist, they suffer.

Besides, public opinion of Norway is incredibly high in the west. The Nordic countries, especially Norway are seen as a sanctuary by many Americans, it would be incredible difficult to manufacture consent to invade a country like this.

There is one more reason. Some empires specialized in warmongering and exploitation, others are considered hitchhikers. See Hitchhikers guide to Imperialism .

Some imperialists administered territory and opened markets. Others provided capital to build railways and link the global economy. Still others produced migratory labour or hauled commodities. Administering territory was the most prestigious job. But it was not the only way to be an imperialist. Profit and power could also be won by hitchhiking.

The Scandinavians are still hitchhiking away. The Danish shipping line A P Moller-Maersk is the largest in the world, moving more than 12 million shipping containers around the globe every year. Oil profits fund Norway’s $1 trillion sovereign wealth fund, which is in turn invested worldwide. Nowadays, they hitchhike on a Pax Americana rather than a Pax Britannica, but it is important to remember that small, globally orientated European countries such as Denmark, Sweden and Norway exist because the arrangement of world geopolitics leaves them a particular space in which to thrive. More than a century after they sold their colonies, the hitchhiking strategy still seems to be paying off.


this will help me a lot, thank you comrade


See the update friend, very important information there.


We came to disagree on how much the embargo mattered. she blames that the under productivity and inefficiency of the Cuban economy is due to the restriction of a free market.

This is a whole load of nonsense. First of all, if the lack of free market hampers the productivity as is claimed, why put sanctions on top of that? Why not let this allegedly subpar system die out on its own because of its own contradictions? The real reason is economic growth doesn’t have much to do with unbirdled capitalism but more with the ability to fill gaps in resource necessities via trade. What would happen the US if it was embargoed like Cuba or Iran are? If the answer is that free market would sort it out, this is plain wrong because the whole country shit its insides out because of disruption from COVID with hundreds of thousands dead and millions without employment risking eviction.

Secondly, the idea that enacting neoliberal reforms is A WAY, let alone the only one, for development of the so-called developing countries is, again, a scam. No country in the history of the world has achieved development through these shitty policies and they are only meant to allow US and allies to loot the resources and labour of overexploited countries held hostage by IMF and World Bank. Countries like South Korea and Japan were only able to develop their economies by protectionist measures. (Edit: Europe and North America gained its wealth by colonisation, imperialism, enslavement, genocide etc.)

US doesn’t invade Norway because it’s an allied white country. It doesn’t need anymore explaining than that.


she did draw a parrarel with cuba and costa rica which apparently is a social democratic nation. She argues that a planned economy makes it less inefficent compared to a domestic free market like farmer markets dont exist in Cuba. i highly doubt that no market economy exists in cuba since they have a tw currency system, but i would still like to know more.


This. Read Ha-Joon’s books, probably will help you.


Capitalist restoration in Russia resulted in 12 million deaths over 20 years


why Norway with a nationalized oil production hasn’t been invaded. The only answer I copied come up with was that Norway is part of the US sphere of influence and participates with imperialism alongside the US. but I don’t feel like that’s a good answer.

That’s part of it. The US would lose allies, not just Norway but a lot of other Europeans. A war of aggression against a fellow NATO country would kill NATO.

The other part is white supremacy. It’s easy for the US to point at a POC and say “he’s got a weapon, he’s coming right for us!!” If it invaded a white country and killed hundreds of thousands of white people, the US white settler labor aristocracy would rise up in rage. It would finally see the US empire for what it is. The US wants to prevent that as long as it can.


i wanted to avoid saying that the US was racist, but i guess its the sad truth.

Discussion Community for fellow Marxist-Leninists and other Marxists.

Rules for /c/communism

Rules that visitors must follow to participate. May be used as reasons to report or ban.

  1. No non-marxists

This subreddit is here to facilitate discussion between marxists.

There are other communities aimed at helping along new communists. This community isn’t here to convert naysayers to marxism.

If you are a member of the police, armed forces, or any other part of the repressive state apparatus of capitalist nations, you will be banned.

  1. No oppressive language

Do not attempt to justify your use of oppressive language.

Doing this will almost assuredly result in a ban. Accept the criticism in a principled manner, edit your post or comment accordingly, and move on, learning from your mistake.

We believe that speech, like everything else, has a class character, and that some speech can be oppressive. This is why speech that is patriarchal, white supremacist, cissupremacist, homophobic, ableist, or otherwise oppressive is banned.

TERF is not a slur.

  1. No low quality or off-topic posts

Posts that are low-effort or otherwise irrelevant will be removed.

This is not a place to engage in meta-drama or discuss random reactionaries on lemmy or anywhere else.

This includes memes and circlejerking.

This includes most images, such as random books or memorabilia you found.

We ask that amerikan posters refrain from posting about US bourgeois politics. The rest of the world really doesn’t care that much.

  1. No basic questions about marxism

Posts asking entry-level questions will be removed.

Questions like “What is Maoism?” or “Why do Stalinists believe what they do?” will be removed, as they are not the focus on this forum.

  1. No sectarianism

Marxists of all tendencies are welcome here.

Refrain from sectarianism, defined here as unprincipled criticism. Posts trash-talking a certain tendency or marxist figure will be removed. Circlejerking, throwing insults around, and other pettiness is unacceptable.

If criticisms must be made, make them in a principled manner, applying Marxist analysis.

The goal of this subreddit is the accretion of theory and knowledge and the promotion of quality discussion and criticism.

Check out ProleWiki for a communist wikipedia.


  • 0 users online
  • 9 users / day
  • 30 users / week
  • 55 users / month
  • 189 users / 6 months
  • 3189 subscribers
  • 1870 Posts
  • Modlog