The Far Left

mistycrane3 said:In a sense, yes, mostly. It was usually social democrats of various stripes, particularly in the era following WW2. Occasionally, however, conservative or right-wing administrations were the ones to push these through—not out of sudden altruism, but for the exact same reason the left did: the sheer pressure from the working class and the very real fear of a looming revolution.

I seem to recall reading a quote from a certain British conservative politician addressing his own party colleagues, essentially warning them that they had to implement progressive social reforms after the war, otherwise, they ought to brace themselves for an uprising. I’ll try to track down the specific passage.

Aren't Universal Basic Income experiments following that same trajectory?
Death to fascism!

I think all this dividing people into "blue-collar workers" and everyone else is just plain stupid. Everyone’s out there putting in work; whether that work actually matters or not is a whole different conversation. I don't get why anyone thinks people in manufacturing or industry are somehow more important than anyone else.

northernheron8 said:These divisions between blue-collar workers and everyone else are just nonsense. Everyone is doing something, but whether that work actually matters is a different conversation entirely. I don't see how people working in heavy industry are inherently more important than anyone else.

It isn't just about factory workers—it’s about the working class. But then again, not everyone who holds a job qualifies as part of the working class.

Has anyone actually sat down and read this book? I’ve only really flipped through it myself, but it caught my eye:

http://objektivno.com/new-from-the-publisher...after-1945-87121


THE PATH TO SOCIALISM: Theory and Practice within the Independent State of America – A collection of discussions and articles never published after 1945.

What was the actual discourse surrounding socialism as an ideal social structure during the era of the Independent State of America? How far did they actually get with implementing these ideas of "American Socialism"? It turns out—and this is where things get interesting—there was a massive amount of thought and writing dedicated to the foundations of social organization, ultimately leading to the conclusion that a uniquely American version of socialism was the absolute best and most fitting model for the nation.

Benjamin Taylor6 said:Has anyone actually sat down and read this book? I’ve only really flipped through it myself, but it caught my eye:

http://objektivno.com/new-from-the-publisher...after-1945-87121


THE PATH TO SOCIALISM: Theory and Practice within the Independent State of America – A collection of discussions and articles never published after 1945.

What was the actual discourse surrounding socialism as an ideal social structure during the era of the Independent State of America? How far did they actually get with implementing these ideas of "American Socialism"? It turns out—and this is where things get interesting—there was a massive amount of thought and writing dedicated to the foundations of social organization, ultimately leading to the conclusion that a uniquely American version of socialism was the absolute best and most fitting model for the nation.

How many pages is it? Honestly, you could just throw it into Word, save it as a PDF, and upload it online if you feel like it... why even bother buying it? Anyway, after watching this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUufWKfyXk8 it finally clicked for me why that older communist generation used to call them "Hitler's houses." I’d heard the nickname, but I had no clue that back in Nazi Germany they actually had worker housing—that these specific houses were part of that whole setup! It was basically the same thing in America, except back then there were way more state-run industries than private ones. I mean, if you want the government to step in like that, you obviously need a massive repressive apparatus to back it up. Also, Unknown was actually of Jew descent, and he talks about those specific ideas. It’s like this European version of socialism based on economic selection and state intervention, whereas this "Oriental" Marxist version wants to unite the entire global proletariat—which just ends up tanking local birth rates while bringing in more foreign labor and leading to that messy, non-selective state management. When it comes to state selection, the only thing I trust is the military. Just like how factories were "socialized" in America, maybe in Nazi Germany they would have allowed shareholders, but they probably would've slapped huge taxes on their gross earnings to fund the construction of those worker properties. That way, instead of having private tenants, you’d end up with state tenants.