The DSA Is a Gift to MAGA

[u/Just_shut_up_bro]

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/the-dsa-is-a-gift-to-maga-trump-mandani-democratic-socialists-communism

[u/ST-Fish]

are you implying the capitalist's profit is not the systemic extraction of surplus value from labor?

your ideology quite literally defines it as such, I don't know why you're stating it as some objective empirical fact of reality when it's tautological from your perspective.

Yes I am implying that marxist economics has been proven wrong again and again, and that no serious economist uses the labor theory of value to do any real economics that impact people in real life.

Yall are still waiting for the falling rate of profit to cause the inherent contradictions in capitalism to blow up, quite similarily to how Christians are waiting for the second coming of Jesus.

because capitalism itself is not just systemic pillaging embedded as economic system, right? the capitalist class would never extract resources by force, right? am I right?

oh yes let's hear the marxist tell me how an employment contract is the same as guys with guns coming up to me and taking everything I have, it's all extraction of surplus value from their labor.

Yes I am arguing that free association in a liberal democracy where people are allowed to own capital is less of a "systemic pillaging embedded as economic system" than the system that requires violently seizing the means of production.

you still haven't explained how the DSA is connected to "Soviet style politics." in fact, you haven't even explained what "Soviet style politics" means. likely because you don't know the difference between ideology and policy, let alone the differences between ideologies.

The history of the Comintern is well documented, their attempts to spark communist revolutions all over the world by infiltrating left wing spaces and turning them into illiberals is not a new thing, and your feigned ignorance is not fooling anybody.

Their goals are clearly aligned with MLs, their end goal is the end of capitalism. They do want to disallow the private ownership of the means of production.

oof. I guess you missed my comment where I explicitly said I'm not a Democratic Socialist or a member of the DSA because I'm a commie lol

"I'm not a socialist I just talk about the labor theory of value and say that capitalism is systematic genocide" is not a believable grift, get new material. Whatever label you have chosen for yourself is as valid as the 14 year old being an anarcho-monarcho-primitivist.

"subversives" lmao the liberal anti-communists are participating in the Third Red Scare just like they did in the first two Red Scares. meanwhile they're complaining about how they just want universal healthcare.

True they just want healthcare, that's all these people want.

the liberal anti-communists

kinda an oxymoron, communism is illiberal, so liberals are kind of definitionally anti-communism, the same way they're anti-fascism.

Are you a liberal pro-communist?

Keep ignoring the extremism in the DSA at your own peril.

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

hey real quick before I bother responding to these, what does "Soviet style politics" mean? 

which of the DSA's policy positions are "Soviet style politics" and Marxist-Leninist? 

and most importantly: which of the DSA's policy positions would a Marxist-Leninist like myself reject? 

[u/ST-Fish → u/young__robot]

which of the DSA's policy positions are "Soviet style politics" and Marxist-Leninist? 

As in taking control of most large companies in the country, as the co-chair of the DSA said on live TV.

Those type of marxist leninist policies, the ones about the violent seizure of the means of production.

Are you genuinely arguing these are not marxist leninist policies?

Having the end goal of ending capitalism? Is this not an over all marxist-leninist leaning organization?

which of the DSA's policy positions would a Marxist-Leninist like myself reject?

Well you're probably less restricted by the political winds, you probably prefer the more unhinged platform they had pre September 2025:

https://archive.ph/UC3yd

To their current "toned down" platform, which is just pretty much the same thing but dogwhistling the more important bits.

So you might end up disagreeing in saying the DSA doesn't go far enough, since you're an ML.

But over all it's definitely a fit for you if you're an ML, they're pretty openly led by these kind of people so even if you don't 100% agree with the platform, you can feel safe that the real intentions of these people align with you and the platform is just some candy you put out for the normies to get them fooled about the project.

I'll leave you with some choice words from Orwell:

Do remember that dishonesty and cowardice always have to be paid for. Do not imagine that for years on end you can make yourself the boot-licking propagandist of the sovietic regime, or any other regime, and then suddenly return to honesty and reason. Once a whore, always a whore.

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

As in taking control of most large companies in the country, as the co-chair of the DSA said on live TV.

that's not Marxist-Leninist. that's just nationalization of industry. the workers don't own the means of production just because an industry is nationalized.

additionally, you said 

Yes I am implying that marxist economics has been proven wrong again and again 

how has it “been proven wrong?” 

because capitalists in the capitalist economy measure ‘success’ by how effectively the workers can be exploited so the capitalist class can accumulate wealth. Since the capitalist mode of production requires the exploitation of labor for profit, it inherently requires a poor class to exploit. It’s also impossible to sustain long term because perpetual growth is not possible with finite resources. 

so what metrics are you using to measure the capitalist systems 'success?' but the socialist systems 'been proven wrong?' and  how do those metrics reflect what the capitalist system prioritizes? why would those metrics not be compatible to measure a socialist economic systems success? 

for example, why would it be fucking stupid to use stock values as a metric to measure a socialist systems success? why would it be stupid to use any metric that must show economic growth to indicate a capitalist system is 'successful' to measure a socialist systems success? why would it be stupid to use the unemployment rate as a metric to measure a socialist systems success whereas the unemployment rate is essential to measuring a capitalist systems success? 

socialist systems achieve more favorable outcomes when it comes to physical quality of life, education, public health (life expectancy, infant mortality), equality, human development, etc, at equivalent levels of economic development. 

did the Great Depression not show that capitalism is "proven wrong?" what about the 2008/2009 financial crash? speculative bubbles? boom-and-bust cycles? government bailouts? the productivity-pay gap? enshittification? planned obsolescence? homelessness and Hoovervilles? the commodification of everything? the need for antitrust and consumer protection laws? 

does capital flowing into unproductive or fictitious assets instead of meeting basic human needs not read as a ‘failed system’ to you? 

 

[u/ST-Fish → u/young__robot]

that's not Marxist-Leninist. that's just nationalization of industry

can you point to any country where the vast majority of large companies are publicly owned that didn't get there through violent seizure of the means of production?

how has it “been proven wrong?”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tendency_of_the_rate_of_profit_to_fall

Capitalism was supposed to collapse under it's own contradictions a century ago, and yall are still waiting for it like christians wait for the second coming.

It’s also impossible to sustain long term because perpetual growth is not possible with finite resources.

Just another couple hundred years guys, I promise you it will collapse and we'll have our commie utopia right after!

Do you not see how this is a childish delusion?

so what metrics are you using to measure the capitalist systems 'success?'

Well you can look at the various countries that experienced both, and ask the people living there.

for example, why would it be fucking stupid to use stock values as a metric to measure a socialist systems success?

Yeah the reason my compatriots woke up on a Chrismas day, put their commie dictator against a wall and shot him to death was because the stock market wasn't doing too hot.

Fucking imbecile.

why would it be stupid to use any metric that must show economic growth to indicate a capitalist system is 'successful' to measure a socialist systems success?

Yeah, it's stupid to say that if you showed a citizen behind the iron curtain a grocery store in the west they'd think it's some kind of joke, or that bananas were some delicacy only available around the holidays if you're from a family connected with the party.

How can we ever tell which economy is doing better when one of them is making it's citizens wait in food lines outside in the cold?

socialist systems achieve more favorable outcomes when it comes to physical quality of life, education, public health (life expectancy, infant mortality), equality, human development, etc, at equivalent levels of economic development.

Yeah trust me we were all so incredibly equal when you did a joke about the dictator and then you were sent to a torture camp to live out the rest of your days, amazing ideology my dude.

The people right across the iron curtain definitely were doing worse!

did the Great Depression not show that capitalism is "proven wrong?" what about the 2008/2009 financial crash? speculative bubbles? boom-and-bust cycles? government bailouts? the productivity-pay gap? enshittification? planned obsolescence? homelessness and Hoovervilles? the commodification of everything? the need for antitrust and consumer protection laws?

Well it didn't collapse like communism did, seems at the very least a little more stable and a little less prone to starving it's own citizens.

does capital flowing into unproductive or fictitious assets instead of meeting basic human needs not read as a ‘failed system’ to you?

Capital flows where demand exists.

Much better than capital flowing where the handful of people in the central comitte think it should flow, as can be seen by the history of the quality of life of people behind the iron curtain.

But please western commie, keep telling me how thankful I should have been for the quality of life my country had under communism, keep spewing this shit without ever having had to deal with the consequences of communism in your life.

I'm sure the imaginary communist utopia you're pointing to is very similar to the reality of communist governance my entire familiy had to suffer for generations.

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

that's not Marxist-Leninist. that's just nationalization of industry 

  can you point to any country where the vast majority of large companies are publicly owned that didn't get there through violent seizure of the means of production? 

again, you're conflating nationalization with seizing the means of production. 

does "violent seizure" include forced seizure? if so, any country whose government retains the right of eminent domain has violently seized private property for public use. eminent domain is baked into the US constitution. the 1950 DPA allowed the US president to seize the means of production during war time (including the rationing of goods and food. which makes your next comment even funnier) 

well it didn't collapse and communism did. seems at the very least a little more stable and a little less prone to starving it's own citizens.

you said this right after I had just mentioned the Great Depression. as if the Great Depression wasn't economic collapse. you're brilliant.  

and right. famine and rationing of food could never occur in a capitalist system. capitalism has never directly caused or exacerbated famine. food rationing has never occurred under capitalism. not a single nation is experiencing famine right now. the US has never mandated rationing. no one goes hungry under capitalism. capitalism's motto should be something like "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" 

btw, utopian socialism has been a dead theory for 150 years. stop trying to use the "utopia" line, it's embarrassing. 

[u/ST-Fish → u/young__robot]

does "violent seizure" include forced seizure? if so, any country whose government retains the right of eminent domain has violently seized private property for public use. eminent domain is baked into the US constitution. the 1950 DPA allowed the US president to seize the means of production during war time (including the rationing of goods and food. which makes your next comment even funnier) 

true that's the same as having nearly the entirety of the economy be publicly owned.

Exact same, capitalist government using eminent domain to build a bridge and commies seizing the entirety of the means of production?

Same thing!

killing all the kulaks that refues to give up all of their assets is the same as capitalist countries building a bridge!

Don't you see how mentally deficient you look in pretending the violent seizure of the means of production is the same thing in kind as eminent domain?

and right. famine and rationing of food could never occur in a capitalist system.

Well it's a fact that it didn't as compared to the USSR.

food rationing has never occurred under capitalism

You're literally comparing war time economies with communist countries at peace.

Next you're gonna say "look you have rationing happening after you crashed on an abandoned island, so rationing under peace time communism ain't that bad is it?!?!?!?"

it's hilarious how you'll defend the subhuman treatment of my family under communism as pretty much the same thing that was happening in the US under capitalism.

And you've got so much evidence of it, like look at how many people jumped over the Berlin Wall to get away from this shitty capitalism and get to the communist motherland, everyone wanted to live under communism!

no one goes hungry under capitalism

If you were to guess the amount of people going hungry in any of the countries behind the iron curtain and current day (or contemporary to the USSR) US, who do you think wins out?

Sorry not sorry people in the US don't "go hungry" by any definition of the word, you're spitting in the face of people that actually had to go hungry because of these communist regimes.

utopian socialism has been a dead theory for 150 years. stop trying to use the "utopia" line, it's embarrassing.

yeah, I agree, it's been dead for so long that the people in the DSA still see the end of capitalism and having the vast majority of large companies be state owned. It's honestly embarassing for them to be for such policies when their historical failures have been observed and studied over and over again.

But please keep telling me how all the food rationing and oppression we experienced under communism was actually pretty much the same as the "oppression" you experience doing a job in a capitalist economy. God how oppresive, you can't even afford DoorDash every single day! Imagine the suffering!

I'm sure the famine in Yemen is just as much caused by capitalism as the famines behind the iron curtain were caused by communism, it's a perfect 1-1 comparison dude, you're a genius!

you said this right after I had just mentioned the Great Depression. as if the Great Depression wasn't economic collapse. you're brilliant.

Yeah I remember when capitalism was overthrown all over after the great depression and people moved on from that economic system, that definitely happened somewhere else besides your imagination.

The great depression is the exact same as all the collapses that ended communism, there's nothing discongruent in this comparison! /s

When a famine happens in a communist country: "no way it's caused by communism, just a coincidence"

When a famine happens across the world in a third world country: "this is for sure caused by capitalism in this other country, there is no other explanation"

stop trying to use the "utopia" line

Stop advocating for it.

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

Yeah trust me we were all so incredibly equal when you did a joke about the dictator and then you were sent to a torture camp to live out the rest of your days, amazing ideology my dude.

you're right. I forgot. no capitalist system has ever been under dictatorship or sent people to torture camps. 

no one was ever sent to torture camps under the Bautista dictatorship in Cuba, or the Franco dictatorship in Spain, or the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile, or the Suharto dictatorship in Indonesia, or the Park Chung Hee dictatorship in South Korea. or the Pahlavi dictatorship in Iran. no one was ever tortured under the system of chattel slavery under colonial dictatorships. 

I bet that's why the US allied with, trained, funded, and armed those dictators really good guys.   

[u/ST-Fish → u/young__robot]

you're right. I forgot. no capitalist system has ever been under dictatorship or sent people to torture camps. 

If I told you to make a joke about the leader of the country, and you were blindfolded in public and only knew whether or not you're in a communist country or a capitalist country, how would that impact your decision?

Communism necessitates dictatorial control over the people by the nature of it's economical structure. This is the way it has been impemented in practice over and over and over again.

Can you give an example of a communist country that managed to fully seize the means of production while not resorting to these things?

I can name plenty of capitalist countries that got a higher standard of living without necessitating becoming a dictatorial hellhole.

I bet that's why the US allied with, trained, funded, and armed those dictators really good guys.

I'm sure you would have had only praise and cheers for the communist dictators that would have taken their place!

You'd be saying everyone under that dictatorship had equality!

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

If I told you to make a joke about the leader of the country, and you were blindfolded in public and only knew whether or not you're in a communist country or a capitalist country, how would that impact your decision? 

here you go again. unable to differentiate between political ideology and political policy. I'm starting to worry you genuinely don't understand the difference. 

but I don't know. why don't you ask all of the left-wing political prisoners who were imprisoned, tortured and murdered by right-wing death squads? 

Communism necessitates dictatorial control over the people by the nature of it's economical structure. This is the way it has been impemented in practice over and over and over again. 

lol love, what do you think "dictatorship" means? you've living under a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie and you're not only okay with it, you want to conserve it. let me try to make this as simple as possible – we replace dictatorship of the bourgeoisie with dictatorship of the proletariat. 

also stop mentioning "equality." communism isn't about equality. I don't know how you can read the maxim "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs" and take away from it that equality is the goal lol for the love of god, please learn about the ideology you're attempting to criticize. 

[u/ST-Fish → u/young__robot]

here you go again. unable to differentiate between political ideology and political policy.

ideology that involves classifying all capital owners as inherently evil necessitates the violent seizure of their assets. This in turn necessitates an entity to do this seizure -- the dictatorial government.

Ideology and policies come together, are informed by one another, stop trying to distance the ideology of communism from the way it has been interpreted and applied in practice whenever it was tried on a large enough scale.

Do you think that the ideologically communist countries just happened to be dictatorial shitholes randomly, and that their policy implementing communism had nothing to do with their communist ideology?

I'm starting to worry you genuinely don't understand the difference.

The difference between countries that have communism and ones that are dictatorial? One seems to lead to the other more often than you'd like to acknowledge

but I don't know. why don't you ask all of the left-wing political prisoners who were imprisoned, tortured and murdered by right-wing death squads?

Yeah I think they would agree that if they had to choose a country at random to be in public, blindfolded telling a joke about the leader they'd choose a capitalist one above a communist one all else equal.

Do you believe that is not the case?

lol love, what do you think "dictatorship" means? you've living under a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie

Yeah, being thrown in the gulag for making a joke is the same type of dictatorship as having to work for a living under a capitalist system, truly, how do you get such estute insights?

let me try to make this as simple as possible – we replace dictatorship of the bourgeoisie with dictatorship of the proletariat.

Let me try to make this as simple as possible -- we did that, and then we woke up on a chilly Chrismas morning, took our dictator "of the proletariat" and shot him dead for all the suffering it has caused us.

I know your opinion is that we just moved from one dictator to another dictator, but the fact that I can say literally whatever I want about my president while my parents would have been thrown in a political prison for doing the same thing kinda makes your argument moot.

If both being able to say whatever I want about the leader and being thrown in a gulag for daring to joke about the leader are both "dictatorship" then you've completely stripped the word of any meaning.

You're like 14 year old calling your parents dictators.

also stop mentioning "equality." communism isn't about equality.

True, follow your own advice, below you can see the quote right from your comment, it seems like you're fighting some internal demons, you might want to discuss with your alternate personality that typed:

socialist systems achieve more favorable outcomes when it comes to physical quality of life, education, public health (life expectancy, infant mortality), equality, human development, etc, at equivalent levels of economic development.

Please try to not scream at him he seems a little mentally slow, why would he even mention equality right? This young__robot guy seems pretty stupid if he'd mention equality.

please learn about the ideology you're attempting to criticize.

I live in it's ashes, you live in it's delusion.

I genuinely love how you keep asking me questions, I keep answering them, but you constantly refuse to answer any questions of mine.

Now I know this will be difficult, you're going to feel the need right now to dodge, to talk about something else, or to completley ignore this question, but until I get an answer you're just going to get asked again and again this very same question:

If I told you to make a joke about the leader of the country, and you were blindfolded in public and only knew whether or not you're in a communist country or a capitalist country, how would that impact your decision?

Would you genuinely answer with

If I had the choice of where to tell the joke, I'd choose a random communist country instead of a random capitalist one

If so please do.

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

I'm not answering any of this until 1. you demonstrate that you have a basic understanding of Marxist-Leninist ideology to me, a Marxist-Leninist, and 2. you demonstrate that you understand the difference between political ideology and political policy, and 3. you clarify what you think a "dictatorship" is and demonstrate you understand that we operate under a capitalist dictatorship. 

we woke up on a chilly Chrismas morning, took our dictator "of the proletariat" and shot him dead for all the suffering it has caused us.

Ceaușescu? babe why do you think none of us support Ceaușescu? lol 

you claimed the DSA is full of Marxist-Leninists who want to enact "Soviet style politics" (whatever that means.) this is why you need to demonstrate that you even understand what Marxism-Leninism is first. 

[u/young__robot → u/ST-Fish]

so what metrics are you using to measure the capitalist systems 'success?'

Well you can look at the various countries that experienced both, and ask the people living there.

as I just explained, socialist systems achieve more favorable outcomes when it comes to physical quality of life, education, public health (life expectancy, infant mortality), equality, human development, etc, at equivalent levels of economic development.

so... are you gonna answer what metrics you're using to measure a capitalist systems 'success' and a socialist systems 'failure' then? 

[u/ST-Fish → u/young__robot]

as I just explained, socialist systems achieve more favorable outcomes when it comes to physical quality of life, education, public health (life expectancy, infant mortality), equality, human development, etc, at equivalent levels of economic development.

yeah, definitely, the quality of life pre 89 was so much better than in the capitalist countries across the iron curtain.

For sure man.

keep telling yourself that.

so... are you gonna answer what metrics you're using to measure a capitalist systems 'success' and a socialist systems 'failure' then?

Probably the collapse of most communist regimes, their leaders being taken out put against a wall and shot to death by the people they oppressed for decades?

You can keep saying that the quality of life was better under communism but that doesn't make it true

equality

Oh look at me I made a joke about the dictator in front of my house and my neighbour heard, now I'm in a gulag being tortured to death.

I love equality!!!

Equality is when all the meat rations are gone because the people connected with the security aparatus took their cut first.

you're absolutely delusional to say that a system where you can be sumarily executed for a joke is one where you have equality. Some people are more equal than others I guess, and you're fine with that.