this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2023
43 points (93.9% liked)

GenZedong

4186 readers
25 users here now

This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.

This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.

We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I’ve listened to the Poor Proles Almanac and they’re basically left-unity (anarchist) preppers. Their information is probably useful either way, though. I just started listening to It Could Happen Here, and the first episode is pretty cringe. Robert Evans is anti-Assad and thinks a Syrian civil war type scenario could happen here. He praises maidan coup fascist protesters (without mentioning their fascism or US backing). And of course, he thinks a collapse could be soon in 2019 and a lot of crazy stuff has happened since, but no civil war. I’ll keep listening critically to see if he has anything decent to say, but not looking good. As the empire crumbles and climate change gets worse is a collapse scenario realistic?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CountryBreakfast@lemmygrad.ml 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Its just my opinion, but it's a hard no from me. Even if the US declines nominally on certain fronts, it is not necessarily declining relative to its peers. So it's it's influence is not really declining noticeably enough to signal qualitative change.

Yes there are plenty of things to be optimistic about, such as dedollarization and seeming to fail in Ukraine, but this will not be a fast enough process to blindside it. The US has time to adapt and disrupt the coalitions that are necessary to push forward and there is still time for mistakes on the part of coalition builders, or antagonistic contradictions developing among them.

Basically, even as the US becomes more and more vulnerable, everyone else is still vulnerable as well.

Also, the US has other weapons such as it's propaganda machine and imo it's never been more dangerous than it is right now. It doesn't need to be persuasive either, only disruptive.

Most importantly, very few people in the US seem to actually want it to fall. This important because even if the US seriously stumbles, it is more likley that Americans generally will seek to recover it's footing instead delivering the killing blow and moving forward in a decolonial and anti-imperialist direction.

At the same time, however, I feel like most of the security the US enjoys is something that could collapes relatively quickly. I just think I would be too optimistic to believe this must happen anytime soon instead of under other circumstances such as a highly developed alternative international coalition and an organized front at home. The BRICS still have work to do imo, but indeed the ball is rolling, just gotta pick up the pace.

[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 13 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Collapse or civil war doesn’t necessarily mean revolution. Robert Evans thinks it would be simultaneous fascist terrorism and a strong urban left movement causing destabilization of the federal government. I’m not really convinced as fascists are probably just going to seize state power and have no need to fight it, but it’s a possibility. The closest thing I can realistically imagine to revolution is the federal government losing control as it runs out of oil and socialists and anti-colonial forces are able to get hold of smaller territories.

[–] CountryBreakfast@lemmygrad.ml 11 points 1 year ago

I agree that unfortunately fascists will likely take state power (if they havent already)

I like the idea that we could control small territories in some way during the chaos. It could be that coalition between socialists and the Tribes could be dangerous to the state in combination with pressure from an international coalition but the only way the US runs out of oil is if someone is insane enough to set the Permian basin on fire along with all the refineries along the gulf. The US is a petrol superpower that basically competes with OPEC+ by itself. Thanks Obama.

[–] REEEEvolution@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Robert Evans

Whn the CIA thinks that, it may hold some truth.

[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The thing is, it’s hard to know if he actually believes in the feds and is just being fed public facing information, or if it’s more truthful based on what the feds actually think.

[–] REEEEvolution@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 1 year ago

So either he is a reactionary or a useful idiot? Doesn't help his case.

[–] Beat_da_Rich@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I see balkanization of the US and maybe a socialist republic forming within the North American land mass as much more likely than a fascist or socialist seizing of US state machinery as it exists currently.

[–] QueerCommie@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago

It seems possible for fascists to seize the state machinery, but if the government started invoking hitler and Mussolini people would revolt, as the know those people are obviously bad. Socialists wouldn’t be able to take the whole country at once for certain, and no strong socialist movement invoking the name of the United States could survive, as those most oppressed and likely to fight are not your average white “middle class” “patriot.”