I'm not sure that holds without the CIA coming in to facilitate that in a relatively new democracy. If a large country with good institutions voted that way it would be a lot harder to pull off a military coup.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That depends on if you believe in Stalin's ideas of a vanguard or Trotskys ideas of a vanguard. According to Trotsky the vanguard of the workers should be democratically elected.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 27 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Or, hear me out, you can be a non-Marxist socialist, because socialism does not only mean Marxism.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm aware, however I assume the person was specifically referring to Stalinism.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 7 points 3 months ago

Then the assumptions they forwarded as absolutes need to be addressed instead of accepted.

[+] SSJMarx@lemm.ee 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Of course, I was taught that Liberal capitalist ran democracy is somehow the only legitimate form of democracy. The question is how should democracy be implemented in a way that ensures the workers have power.

[+] SSJMarx@lemm.ee 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It couldn't possibly be that people are too scared to criticize the CCP, right? ... right?

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What the hell are you talking about? China is using "communism" to mask the fact that they're a state capitalist dictatorship. Nothing about China is socialist and in many ways corporations in China face even less regulations and restrictions then the west. I would also like to see the source of that statistic because outside observers have been banned from making any statistics about the Chinese government and economy.

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Authoritarian governments never allow themselves to be temporary. Generally speaking, they usually have to be forcibly removed.

[–] suction@lemmy.world 12 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

You’ve seen them on the telly, those authoritarian governments that resign peacefully when their work is done.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Theoretically, amendments could be passed to alter the Constitution into anything, if they have support from enough states. Then again, if (theoretically) enough people support a radical change that is prevented because of the outsized influence of some states, how is that democratic?

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 4 points 3 months ago

Understood, thanks!

[–] randoot@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago

No, if enough people vote for socialist candidates and they pass a law that says all property now belongs to the state, then it'd be enforced just like any other current law.

The transition could be gradual. If we started nationalizing companies that get too big, and do that for a few generations then the state would own 99% of the economy.

If we keep raising property tax, you'd effectively get to the point where people are leasing the land rather than owning it.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It's not strictly necessary, but it sure does seem to keep happening.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Unless China does something very funny to their billionaire class and starts pushing the perpetual revolution, I think it's fairly safe to assume traditional Marxist thought is no longer the most dominant socialist school, and when the resource wars start in earnest there will be some genuine shifts in what kind of government a socialist revolution seeks to enact.

That or the fascists just win this time.

[–] Emmie@lemm.ee 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Communism brain rot is trendy nowadays. It’s the last refuge for the tortured mind of the permanently online doomers. It’s almost non existent in real life thankfully

[–] pyre@lemmy.world 3 points 3 months ago

that usually ends in disaster. never mind the fact that authoritarian governments like the power and wouldn't want to give it back, which defeats the entire point of socialism...

but even if you have a completely benign dictator (usually just a fantasy but for the sake of argument let's say we had one) people, especially in democracies, don't like the idea of a coup, unless it's them doing it but then it's a revolution. but that could also lead to reactionary sentiment.

we've seen this happen in Iran. democracy gets fucked with by a US coup, people react with a revolution but unfortunately reactionary forces use the anger to their advantage and devolve into a different kind of authoritarian regime anyway.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago

Dude Coyote'ed himself.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Socialism replaces Liberal democracy with something else (depends on the specific ideology).

[–] pewgar_seemsimandroid@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

lib dems mad.

[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

LibDems (and Liberals in general) get pissed when I remind them that Liberalism isnt a left wing ideology.

load more comments (1 replies)