Replying to nobody

Even the Polish Solidarnosc movement, which achieved the superficial success of “free and fair” elections and reasonable concessions for workers’ rights over a more than 30 year period through mass work stoppages, was not without blood. And much of the ground that was gained from these relatively peaceful actions has since been lost.

IMO, until humans figure out a way to make incrementalism work equally well for those seeking liberty as those who seek to oppress, we will always be locked in a cycle whereby periodic violent revolution is the only thing that achieves more than marginal success in throwing off shackles.

Wait until people in the west start routinely missing three days’ food at a time. It’s the only stressor that ever brings about real action and mass abandonment of belief in peaceful solutions at a critical enough mass to make a difference.
Avatar
hh 1y ago

Well, to begin with, do not misinterpret Gramsci: he wasn't "against" violence. He just thought that from the utilitarian point of view, cultural warfare was more productive. He has been proven right.

Marxism in various forms and branches is the hegemonic ideology in Western Europe, almost completely unchallenged. It is *completely* unchallenged as *the* academic methodological framework in all social sciences, thus in political science too.

This is what has brought about the current fascist regime (to be more academic: "Corporate State"), also called "mixed economy", "social democracy", etc.

Nobody can question that Gramsci and the Marxists have won utterly, when the State in most of Western Europe actively collects and controls 50% or more of the GDP, and doesn't leave a single gap untouched in any aspect of society, the economy, morals, for individual autonomy and free association. Not even the Soviet Union achieved such levels of complete control over "the means of production".

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.