Good takedown. I’d like to see Roderic and Mason’s reaction to your and my criticisms. Is this worth making a Twitter account over, and if so would you be fine if I shared this?
Varoufakis: "Capitalism's changed so much it can't be called capitalism anymore."
Mason: "Capitalism hasn't changed. Your eyes are deceiving you if it looks like it has to you!"
People who read Lenin: "Capitalism can change a lot without abandoning its core components and ceasing to be capitalism. What you are seeing is the tendency for monopolies to form and innovation to thusly fall."
I’m pretty sure the USSR did help with the founding. At the time most people agreed Jews needed somewhere to escape persecution. Even the Palestinians understood and let them buy property. Zionism was not always synonymous with Theodor Herzel’s open colonialism. There was a socialist faction. The USSR was allied with Israel at first. At some point the colonial pro-US faction won out. Idk when the USSR stopped sending aid so I wouldn’t be surprised if they supported early colonization. Once the pro-US faction won out they didn’t want anything to do with the USSR so they cut ties.
Take my story with a grain of salt, I don’t remember the source of all my information besides the Intervention’s series a bit. The only conversation i remember around this was on Redd*t where I suggested that the USSR surely wasn’t involved with the bad bits of Zionism, and someone else said they were. I hope other comrades have more knowledge and sources.
I mentioned that in a comment below. I feel like the title suggests that he could make a good point about Lenin’s argument showing that you can’t return from finance capitalism, but instead the piece is just trying to say capitalism has always been exactly the same in terms of industry and finance, which is simply not true.
I don’t think Hudson or Doctorow have called it feudalism. Hudson says it’s finance capitalism which is worse than industrial capitalism. That makes me think of something, in Imperialism Lenin talks about how finance capital is the destiny of capital, and the that is the point at which capital stops being progressive. However, it’s foolish to try to return to pre-monopoly because the cycle will repeat. Doctorow says rentierism is carried over from feudalism and has had a great rise in the digital age. The early capitalists hated rentierism (just look at Adam Smith), but the ultimate goal of capitalists is to be a rentier because then they don’t have to do much for profits. Varoufakis is wrong because he doesn’t understand the definition of capitalism or how it can change.
You mean he can answer my questions? Where would I contact him? I don’t have a Twitter account and don’t want to make one. I feel like he should be on Lemmygrad considering he’s involved in GitHub and his work is so popular here.
I wouldn’t be surprised. I heard the Modi regime is trying to become the next Zionist lobby. They want to make “Indian” synonymous with Hindu and increase Islamophobia. He’s probably funded by them as an Indian far-right politician. I know Tulsi Gabbard is. (I think both are posturing “anti-war” [anti-ukraine], but hawkish on China and “Israel.”)
Actually don’t send them, with globalization we can exploit you from the safety of our walled and militarized states. You can send your highly educated people though, maybe they’ll get a job, maybe they’ll join the army of surplus labor.
Ramaswamy’s super weird. He’s a superficial corporate candidate that came out of nowhere. Most of what he does is say he agrees with trump. He also wants to raise the voting age to hold off zoomers from voting for a couple years.
Good takedown. I’d like to see Roderic and Mason’s reaction to your and my criticisms. Is this worth making a Twitter account over, and if so would you be fine if I shared this?