Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

De Valera was no socialist. His ideal were the maidens dancing at the crossroads. He was a Catholic church petit-bourgeois stooge.

Heartless coloniser scum

It’s very hard to explain in even a long comment. There are also different ways of conceiving them - basically and extremely TLDR they are fundamental (material/social) contradictions in a process of self-development. Mao wrote a book ‘on contradiction’ which is worth reading but his dialectics has certainly been subject to criticism as it can be quite mechanical and also his explanation of development involving contradictions is quite simplistic - it has been said that he was influenced by the historic Chinese dialectical tradition. The classic texts on idealistic dialectics (not counting Aristotle) would be by Hegel (most obviously the Phenomenologie der Geist or Logik but anything of his is full of it). These are not the right place to start however, and I would suggedt reading but not relying upon an introductory text before checking out Lenin who wrote some great stuff on it too. Perhaps the best materialistic dialectical book is Kapital vol 1 by Marx. There’s a huge amount more I could say here but will end it now.

This sounds an insane project. Instead of all this academic ‘leftist’ verbiage - we need a return to basic and commonsense slogans which connect to people and pose the question of power. Bread, land, peace etc.

Removed by mod

For all its capitalist growth, China is a very long way off communism, sadly. When the CCP allowed factory owners to stay on as members - that should have proof if it were needed of the implications of going down the capitalist road.

If you have read and understood Mao you should know this already. That doesn’t mean any less opposition to US imperialism etc but we are Marxists and can do dialectical contradictions - right?

Instead of what? Most states have income support measures or a social welfare regime already. Are they going to be anything better? What will impact be on collective organisation of working-class?

Clearly the enemies of the Soviet Union might be expected to proceed with the logic of ‘the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ - of course, it is a false logic for Marxists. The Kerenskyists and even Monarchists claimed the same about Lenin and the Bolsheviks seeking to associate them with the Germans - Lenin rightly destroyed them.

Trotsky remained true to Leninist norms, certainly by comparison to Stalin who basically ditched them all. Trotsky believed that the only way for the SU to overcome nazism and fascism was for the working class to overthrow the bureaucracy as it was a barrier to struggle. He did not think the Stalinist state could survive the war. Of course, history proved differently to his forecast: primarily as a result of the ‘total war’ specificities of the war and the underlying strength of socialist economy and the consciousness that flowed from it. Trotsky’s works from 1923-32 are absorbed with with the challenge if defeating fascism as well as imperialism.

Removed by mod

UBI is a con job of the liberals.

Think it’s important to say that Diamat - it is probably incorrect to label it thus but we know whatwe are taking about - is not just an ideological framework but an active method. There is a two-way dialectic between our engagement in objective reality and our interpretation of that reality. No correct practice without theory and no correct theory without mass practice.

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Mass party of the class with a socialist platform is a closed book?