>>1467>Didn't address the fact that the largest Communist Party in the world wants nothing to do with cultural leftism
I don't know what you mean with this.
I'm not sure why you think I'm saying anything about culture.
>abandoned any notion of workers democracy long ago.
You are referencing China right ? They have their own democratic aspirations. They say they are a Deliberative Democracy.
It would derail the debate to much to start analyzing that, but you are denying them the potential for democracy by default, and that's not correct.
>What they have opted for is something like the bureacratic management of the total economy through policy mechanism as well as social programs that encourage specific traits among the population.
Sure China has bureaucratic management, everybody does, western corporations have vast bureaucracies.
The accusation that China has a soft-eugenics program that selects for traits among the population, has to be rejected, there is no evidence of that.
I can't imagine that they would attempt something so unscientific.
>As I've said, you can't point to a concrete case where some hypothetical 'workers' democracy produced the result you say it will. The reason is simple. Such a workers democracy is an abstract fantasy that, when tried, collapse under the weight of material reality.
let me be clear i don't know what you imagine a workers democracy would be like, so i'm going to talk about the workers democracy the way i understand it.
You certainly can't pull one out of your ass and deploy it like a pop up tent, it would take time and dedication to build it. You need higher order social organization to build effective mass participation for a political system. 20th century socialism did not have the technical means, it needs something like the internet just for the logistics.
>Inb4 but muh fuedalism and muh people thought that capitalism was unrealistic.>Well golly jee. Why didn't we just skip to socialism from fuedalism.>Oh, that's right, material constraints that dictated the direction of political economy, much the same way as today.
I don't understand how that's related to anything that was discussed.
>I think we can both agree that the current system is fucked.
>You, however, offer a fantasy-cope solution that's been tried by more qualified and capable people and has never worked. In the process, you forgo structural amendments that are realistic but not pure enough in the eyes of effete faggotry, opting instead to tacitly support the actually existing ruling class against muh dangerous rightoids earning 60k a year.
I think you have mistaken my political positions. I'm not a liberal telling you to voot the lesser evil.
I'm here to do ideological struggle against capitalist narratives that blame the proletariat for the dis-function of capitalism.
I'm just saying don't blame the proles, blame the system.