Downloaded the book now. Looking forward to read it! Thank you for your great contributions, Torkil Lauesen, and all of you in Iskra Books and Critical Theory Workshop!
Thank you for this program. Every socialist movement was either slaughtered or threatened with war, as in Russia, where it failed also because of the need to use a ever growing percentage of the production for military defence. So China is in deed a new phenomenon, as the first time in the world a socialist nation will act not out of a position of the weak. My take on Socialism à la China is as following: - Hold capitalist away from power - Nationalize big industries and finance to control them - Narrow the income gap - Spend all you can in education and science for all - Develop the rural regions to avoid migration - Bring birth rate to 2,3 for a stable population - Teach people to take over responsibility and to participate in political processes. I am eager to read Torkils book an will try to get in here in Germany.
Just finished the book. Overall a pretty good primer on the history of socialism, and I agreed with a number of Torkil’s assessments. However whilst being largely critical of western Marxism, it’s clear the book was still written by a western Marxist: 1. a number of Trotskys critique of Stalin are adopted, 2. SwCC and the Deng period being labelled multiple times as “a failure” 3. Describing the war in Ukraine as a conquest for land between two capitalist powers (Russia and US/NATO) and 4. Describing ‘higher quality productive forces’ as a euphemism for Chinese capitalists Would be great to see a critique of the book from the likes of Roland Boer
Socialism simply means “the use of public funds to pay for social services” and is necessary for any capitalist economy to function (every capitalist economic today is what’s called a “mixed economy” ie a mix of capitalism and socialism). You are confusing socialism and communism, which means “communal ownership of the means of production”.
Socialism is the worker-owned economy, which can be in a state and include some form of class division still. Communism is the same economically, but it is also stateless and classless.
"When the government does stuff" isn't socialism. You're trying to sound authoritative without having a clue what you're talking about. The US, for example, isn't 'part socialist' because it builds public roads.
@ I defined it in the most simple way possible and you still don’t understand 😅 And “trying to sound authoritative” lol you’re projecting, you read some Marxist bs and now YOU think you’re an authority on economics. Stop projecting your arrogance and grandiose narcissism onto others and making personal attacks against people you don’t know, just because you don’t agree with them. It says a lot about your mental and emotional maturity. The problem is you neosocialists/marxists are misinformed and don’t understand the true meaning of words and basic economic concepts, and that’s a big part of the reason why economic progress and social equity hasn’t been achieved yet. You’re part of the problem.
This is so important. Shout-out to Iskra.
Downloaded the book now. Looking forward to read it! Thank you for your great contributions, Torkil Lauesen, and all of you in Iskra Books and Critical Theory Workshop!
That’s why he’s the GOAT
Downloaded and excited to read :)
Thank you for this program.
Every socialist movement was either slaughtered or threatened with war, as in Russia, where it failed also because of the need to use a ever growing percentage of the production for military defence.
So China is in deed a new phenomenon, as the first time in the world a socialist nation will act not out of a position of the weak.
My take on Socialism à la China is as following:
- Hold capitalist away from power
- Nationalize big industries and finance to control them
- Narrow the income gap
- Spend all you can in education and science for all
- Develop the rural regions to avoid migration
- Bring birth rate to 2,3 for a stable population
- Teach people to take over responsibility and to participate in political processes.
I am eager to read Torkils book an will try to get in here in Germany.
Just bumped into Iskra books, amazing, and downloaded Building Peoples Art by Muller ❤
Samir Amin wrote a book called Russia and the long transition to socialism. Amazing book too.
Cool, thanks a lot !!
Very mind opening discussion, I greatly look forward to reading this book. I'll make sure to prepare myself accordingly. Stay safe comrades! 🔫
Just finished the book. Overall a pretty good primer on the history of socialism, and I agreed with a number of Torkil’s assessments.
However whilst being largely critical of western Marxism, it’s clear the book was still written by a western Marxist:
1. a number of Trotskys critique of Stalin are adopted,
2. SwCC and the Deng period being labelled multiple times as “a failure”
3. Describing the war in Ukraine as a conquest for land between two capitalist powers (Russia and US/NATO) and
4. Describing ‘higher quality productive forces’ as a euphemism for Chinese capitalists
Would be great to see a critique of the book from the likes of Roland Boer
I'm getting the book
Cool I have learned a lot, i have downloaded that book. thanks i will share it with my communist brothers and sisters
Socialism simply means “the use of public funds to pay for social services” and is necessary for any capitalist economy to function (every capitalist economic today is what’s called a “mixed economy” ie a mix of capitalism and socialism).
You are confusing socialism and communism, which means “communal ownership of the means of production”.
Socialism is the worker-owned economy, which can be in a state and include some form of class division still. Communism is the same economically, but it is also stateless and classless.
@ no that’s Marxism which is neither true socialism or communism (which I have defined above).
"When the government does stuff" isn't socialism. You're trying to sound authoritative without having a clue what you're talking about. The US, for example, isn't 'part socialist' because it builds public roads.
@ I defined it in the most simple way possible and you still don’t understand 😅
And “trying to sound authoritative” lol you’re projecting, you read some Marxist bs and now YOU think you’re an authority on economics. Stop projecting your arrogance and grandiose narcissism onto others and making personal attacks against people you don’t know, just because you don’t agree with them. It says a lot about your mental and emotional maturity.
The problem is you neosocialists/marxists are misinformed and don’t understand the true meaning of words and basic economic concepts, and that’s a big part of the reason why economic progress and social equity hasn’t been achieved yet. You’re part of the problem.
@@frogstrap yes it is you clueless Marxist 😂