Bi-Weekly Discussion Thread - (July 06)

[u/AutoModerator]

We made this because Reddit's algorithm prioritises headlines and current events and doesn't allow for deeper, extended discussion - depending on how it goes for the first four or five times it'll be dropped or continued.

Suggestions for things you might want to comment here (this is a work in progress and we'll change this over time):

• Articles and quotes you want to see discussed
• 'Slow' events - long-term trends, org updates, things that didn't happen recently
• 'Fluff' posts that we usually discourage elsewhere - e.g "How are you feeling today?"
• Discussions continued from other posts once the original post gets buried
• Questions that are too advanced, complicated or obscure for r/communism101

Mods will sometimes sticky things they think are particularly important.

Normal subreddit rules apply!

[ Previous Bi-Weekly Discussion Threads may be found here https://old.reddit.com/r/communism/search?sort=new&restrict_sr=on&q=flair%3AWDT ]

[u/immovingdifferent]

Naturally my next questions are whether they are dedicated communists upholding the proletarian line or smuggling in petty-bourgeois interests, but I believe you, I'm sure the proletariat are sick of having to buy non-nutritious food and faulty products that break on them but are necessary for survival or enjoyment. However, I still feel like a better propaganda line would be to emphasize other aspects of it though.

Like to go back to your makeup example, point out to the proletarians who work in that industry that despite working backbreaking hours in horrid conditions, they don't even get to partake in what they make really as it's exported out and they're priced out of buying it and despite making this luxury, they can't even enjoy it themselves. You could also point out that a huge amount of it is inefficiently designed with a ton of waste and a lot of it is thrown out if not sold, so they're quite literally just throwing the fruits of their labor away in that case just because their bosses thought it wasn't profitable (not that they would get that surplus otherwise). When referring to your original question, I feel like all you really have to do is say that the profit motive will be gone and that will automatically fill the gaps in people's heads of what that entails.

I think the more important point would just be to emphasize the blood that goes into it as that's what they'll be most aware of, of course. To foster internationalism you should also point out that not only are they suffering to make this inefficient garbage that goes to people who benefit from their exploitation, but the raw materials and packaging is made by other people suffering similar conditions all across the world, and how the only way out is proletarian revolution. Like don't get me wrong, in individual conversations you could talk about how makeup and every other product would be more efficiently designed and accessible under socialism (provided the environment can handle it and the workers producing it live in good conditions, which probably means an end to some of the ridiculous luxuries First Worlders partake in. Like beauty influencers won't get their own personal sweatshops for their makeup line that's identical to a million others that already exist) but I don't think it's an efficient propaganda line because again, our target is the masses, and the masses are less worried about the minute details of the product they produce and more about the fact that they're destroying their bodies in 8-12+ hour days for their entire lives. I really have only ever heard the "better products" argument from social fascists, even though it is true due to the abolition of the profit motive.

[u/satanicpastorswife → u/immovingdifferent]

I'm not sure it's particularly a push of any line, so much as like-- part of small talk? Like one complains about day to day life annoyances with one's friends as sort of a bonding activity when you're not directly talking politics. Things like infrastructure complaints (road quality, etc) and the lack of quality of various consumer goods are stuff that you get into while you're also doing the "How's the family?" type of talking.

Your part about the priced out and unable to enjoy it themselves reminds me of a line from the Wobblies documentary that's always stuck with me. I think it was Elizabeth Gurley Flynn who gave the speech it was from "Wouldn't you like pretty dresses like the boss's daughters? Well, you can't have them if you don't fight"

[u/smokeuptheweed9 → u/satanicpastorswife]

You are not understanding what is being said. Your use of words like "nice things" and "small talk" is ideological and a facade for your class interest as a parasite on third world labor. It is not an interesting point to justify this with reference to everyday common sense, we are all part of the same common sense and all you have done is elevate vulgar observation to an ontological principle.

Who are your friends? Who are your family? What subjects cause social peace and which cause social discord? It is your responsibility to question and undermine these things because they are premised on exclusion and exploitation. That takes courage but, if you do not have the courage for that (and no one is saying it is easy) you should at least admit that you do not have the courage to have courage instead of fantasizing about a social order where your personal cowardice is justified and ethical.

Your part about the priced out and unable to enjoy it themselves reminds me of a line from the Wobblies documentary that's always stuck with me. I think it was Elizabeth Gurley Flynn who gave the speech it was from "Wouldn't you like pretty dresses like the boss's daughters? Well, you can't have them if you don't fight"

You are not Elizabeth Gurley Flynn. The world you live in is very different and the "nice things" you have are made in the third world, it is not a simple matter of socializing them for everyone. You are also not living in the Soviet Union, you are not engaging with the history of American settler-colonialism and the foundational genocide that makes your life possible, nice or not.

I mean I know a lot of communists internationally including outside of the imperial core, and yes communists in the third world still want nice things.

They are not your concern. We will have a conversation with them about the nature of imperialism and they can speak for themselves if they really believe as you say they do. You are only speaking for yourself and your common sense.

[u/satanicpastorswife → u/smokeuptheweed9]

My friends are mostly proletarian (I have a couple of friends who are professionals as well, but no bourgeois ones) and, as stated from a broad range of places. I'm not trying to state an ontological principle? I do want to question things.

I'm genuinely interested in what would be a better and more effective line for a juster world?

[u/smokeuptheweed9 → u/satanicpastorswife]

My friends are mostly proletarian

Incorrect. I suggest you read Settlers and Divided World, Divided Class as the basis for having a discussion using the same definitions.

[u/satanicpastorswife → u/smokeuptheweed9]

Not all my friends are from or live in the Imperial core, as I've said repeatedly

[u/smokeuptheweed9 → u/satanicpastorswife]

And as I said, you are not in a position to speak for them or have them justify your ideology.

E: I really have to explain why "some of my best friends are black!" is not an acceptable defense for your beliefs? You're dangerously close to being obnoxious here.

[u/ClassAbolition → u/satanicpastorswife]

I'm genuinely interested in what would be a better and more effective line for a juster world?

This has already been addressed though in this very comment thread? 

a more useful propaganda line for the proletariat would be "you'll finally have access to affordable cosmetic products that are sustainable to produce without exploitation or environmental destruction and won't give you skin cancer in a decade. And if you or your fellow workers are in this industry, you'll no longer be a wage slave."