[News] China protests over Zero-Covid policy

[Zeberdi]

Every day is a school day on NSC

Wiki is a mine of information

 

[beorhthelm]

I haven't read the thread just clicked on the last page and have seen a discussion of communism. It got me wondering has anyone here actually ever read The Communist Manifesto fully?

I only ask because I studied Marx at uni. It was only for my undergraduate degree and only for a term but the course was based almost entirely on The Communist Manifesto...and even we didn't read the whole book so I'd be interested to know if anyone actually has.

As I remember it, and my memory isn't the best - it was over 20 years ago, Marx didn't actually talk too much about what a communist state would actually look like. The little he did describe didn't involve the deliberate starving or slaughter of the people. It actually, as my Professor stated, sounded quite a lot like Sweden. Whether Sweden has changed politically/socially in the last 20 odd years I have no idea. I just found it interesting that there was a country that was pretty close to what Marx actually talked about and that it wasn't one of the 'Communist' nations but a democracy.

i have. you're right it doesnt go into real solutions, beyond everything owned by the state, break up of social and economic models. mostly complaining everything bad is fault of the bourgeois and the bourgeois is bad*. Sweden might have cherry pick some ideas (as socialism) but i see a nation a long way from the Marx ideal. Das Capital is more involved, detail text that i've not read.

*which i always find ironic as Marx and Engles must have been, Shirley?

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Just as the thread was finally dying you've given him an opportunity to talk about something he might actually know about.....

It's fine, if there's anything I've picked up from Swansman, it's that Sweden is now just another branch of the global conspiracy, governed by an oligarchy who were spawned onto this Earth solely to make themselves richer and sell weapons to child soldiers in the Congo.
No democracy, no socialism, and now they've joined NATO they're just another franchise of the American empire.
Of course, soon it'll be run by the Chinese, via tiny drones who'll fly into their bedrooms and kill everybody the minute anybody stops making ABBA themed ticktock videos and starts thinking for themselves.

 

[beorhthelm]

relating to the original topic, seen some news China may be trying some exit from zero covid, with claims millions of lives have been saved so far, the lastest strain it no worse than flu.

 

[Swansman]

I haven't read the thread just clicked on the last page and have seen a discussion of communism. It got me wondering has anyone here actually ever read The Communist Manifesto fully?

I only ask because I studied Marx at uni. It was only for my undergraduate degree and only for a term but the course was based almost entirely on The Communist Manifesto...and even we didn't read the whole book so I'd be interested to know if anyone actually has.

As I remember it, and my memory isn't the best - it was over 20 years ago, Marx didn't actually talk too much about what a communist state would actually look like. The little he did describe didn't involve the deliberate starving or slaughter of the people. It actually, as my Professor stated, sounded quite a lot like Sweden. Whether Sweden has changed politically/socially in the last 20 odd years I have no idea. I just found it interesting that there was a country that was pretty close to what Marx actually talked about and that it wasn't one of the 'Communist' nations but a democracy.

Communist... well, certainly socialist and with a real attempt of taking a huge step towards communism in the 1960s-1970s when the minister of finances suggested that all Swedish workers should be co-owners in whatever company they worked for.

In 1970, around 40% of the Swedes worked for the state, another 40% worked for Wallenberg (Saab, Volvo, Ericsson, Astra etc.) and the rest for various smaller companies.

There was a power struggle between Social Democrats who under Olof Palme wanted to go further left (though they didn't want the Communist Party to have any power as they were in bed with Soviet) and Wallenberg who wanted Sweden to head into right-politics.

This power struggle had many layers.

The Wallenbergs were great friends with CIA-director Allen Dulles and didn't mind helping them getting the Swedish Intelligency Services (SÄPO) under direct American command, as controlling the security services is key to make things happen. The boss over at SÄPO said no, but the Swedish Social Democrats knew they'd come again (which they did) and started their own intelligence service (the IB).

With one secret force pushing Sweden towards the right and one pushing it towards the left, Sweden just remained a social democratic country never really taking the step over to the right-wing no-power-or-money-to-the-people thing most of the world was doing and also not a step into communism (the idea to have all Swedish workers owning shares in companies they worked for was called off due to pressure from Wallenberg).

This power struggle & compromise continued until Olof Palme was murdered and then Sweden could finally become a somewhat normal right-wing country (take from the poor, give to the rich) like all the others.

But indeed your professor was probably right that Sweden was as communist as you'll ever see in the Western world. No real classes - the working class/middle class was just one grey mass and the only upper class were those close to the Wallenberg family, lots of state-owned companies, welfare for everyone, free education, heavy taxes (immensly popular author Astrid Lindgren destroyed the Social Democratic rule for a few years when she was angry about needing to pay 101% in taxes), extremely powerful trade unions, strong employment laws, support of the rights of the poor all over the world (Palme was paying pretty much half of the ANC in the struggle against apartheid) etc. - things people would associate with communism if they knew what communism was.

Starting with Olof Palmes death however, Sweden has become less socialist/communist with every passing day so there has been a massive change in the last 35 years. A lot of things remain but without the power struggle of the past (the governments since Palme have all been in bed with the US & Wallenberg) it only goes in one direction - less social justice and more power and money accumulated at the top.

Marxist ideas goes well with democracy, there is no problem combining the two - but that is mainly because if people had a truly Marxist rulership, they would rarely if ever vote for anything else, because people like good pay, small differences (if any) between classes, long holidays, safe employment, free education, affordable housing and so forth.

Liberals and conservatives say that these things aren't possible. But they are possible, it has been proven, as long as they are allowed to be possible. But as I said before... whenever a Marxist party/individual gets in charge of a country, the US and their colonies (like Sweden and UK) will do their utmost to murder those who are trying to create a socially fair society. People will either ignore it or call it a conspiracy theory (despite all the proof of the US overthrowing socialist governments and leaders in South America etc.) but thats the reality of it. Marxist ideas can be the core in a society, if it was allowed by the elite.

It's fine, if there's anything I've picked up from Swansman, it's that Sweden is now just another branch of the global conspiracy, governed by an oligarchy who were spawned onto this Earth solely to make themselves richer and sell weapons to child soldiers in the Congo.
No democracy, no socialism, and now they've joined NATO they're just another franchise of the American empire.

Good, seems you've learned a bit.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Communist... well, certainly socialist and with a real attempt of taking a huge step towards communism in the 1960s-1970s when the minister of finances suggested that all Swedish workers should be co-owners in whatever company they worked for.

In 1970, around 40% of the Swedes worked for the state, another 40% worked for Wallenberg (Saab, Volvo, Ericsson, Astra etc.) and the rest for various smaller companies.

There was a power struggle between Social Democrats who under Olof Palme wanted to go further left (though they didn't want the Communist Party to have any power as they were in bed with Soviet) and Wallenberg who wanted Sweden to head into right-politics.

This power struggle had many layers.

The Wallenbergs were great friends with CIA-director Allen Dulles and didn't mind helping them getting the Swedish Intelligency Services (SÄPO) under direct American command, as controlling the security services is key to make things happen. The boss over at SÄPO said no, but the Swedish Social Democrats knew they'd come again (which they did) and started their own intelligence service (the IB).

With one secret force pushing Sweden towards the right and one pushing it towards the left, Sweden just remained a social democratic country never really taking the step over to the right-wing no-power-or-money-to-the-people thing most of the world was doing and also not a step into communism (the idea to have all Swedish workers owning shares in companies they worked for was called off due to pressure from Wallenberg).

This power struggle & compromise continued until Olof Palme was murdered and then Sweden could finally become a somewhat normal right-wing country (take from the poor, give to the rich) like all the others.

But indeed your professor was probably right that Sweden was as communist as you'll ever see in the Western world. No real classes - the working class/middle class was just one grey mass and the only upper class were those close to the Wallenberg family, lots of state-owned companies, welfare for everyone, free education, heavy taxes (immensly popular author Astrid Lindgren destroyed the Social Democratic rule for a few years when she was angry about needing to pay 101% in taxes), extremely powerful trade unions, strong employment laws, support of the rights of the poor all over the world (Palme was paying pretty much half of the ANC in the struggle against apartheid) etc. - things people would associate with communism if they knew what communism was.

Starting with Olof Palmes death however, Sweden has become less socialist/communist with every passing day so there has been a massive change in the last 35 years. A lot of things remain but without the power struggle of the past (the governments since Palme have all been in bed with the US & Wallenberg) it only goes in one direction - less social justice and more power and money accumulated at the top.

Marxist ideas goes well with democracy, there is no problem combining the two - but that is mainly because if people had a truly Marxist rulership, they would rarely if ever vote for anything else, because people like good pay, small differences (if any) between classes, long holidays, safe employment, free education, affordable housing and so forth.

Liberals and conservatives say that these things aren't possible. But they are possible, it has been proven, as long as they are allowed to be possible. But as I said before... whenever a Marxist party/individual gets in charge of a country, the US and their colonies (like Sweden and UK) will do their utmost to murder those who are trying to create a socially fair society. People will either ignore it or call it a conspiracy theory (despite all the proof of the US overthrowing socialist governments and leaders in South America etc.) but thats the reality of it. Marxist ideas can be the core in a society, if it was allowed by the elite.

Good, seems you've learned a bit.

I've at least learnt a bit about succinctness.

 

[Zeberdi]

.., has anyone here actually ever read The Communist Manifesto fully?

Who needs a Manifesto when we have this…

Communist... well, certainly socialist and with a real attempt of taking a huge step towards communism in the 1960s-1970s when the minister of finances suggested that all Swedish workers should be co-owners in whatever company they worked for.

In 1970, around 40% of the Swedes worked for the state, another 40% worked for Wallenberg (Saab, Volvo, Ericsson, Astra etc.) and the rest for various smaller companies.

There was a power struggle between Social Democrats who under Olof Palme wanted to go further left (though they didn't want the Communist Party to have any power as they were in bed with Soviet) and Wallenberg who wanted Sweden to head into right-politics.

This power struggle had many layers.

The Wallenbergs were great friends with CIA-director Allen Dulles and didn't mind helping them getting the Swedish Intelligency Services (SÄPO) under direct American command, as controlling the security services is key to make things happen. The boss over at SÄPO said no, but the Swedish Social Democrats knew they'd come again (which they did) and started their own intelligence service (the IB).

With one secret force pushing Sweden towards the right and one pushing it towards the left, Sweden just remained a social democratic country never really taking the step over to the right-wing no-power-or-money-to-the-people thing most of the world was doing and also not a step into communism (the idea to have all Swedish workers owning shares in companies they worked for was called off due to pressure from Wallenberg).

This power struggle & compromise continued until Olof Palme was murdered and then Sweden could finally become a somewhat normal right-wing country (take from the poor, give to the rich) like all the others.

But indeed your professor was probably right that Sweden was as communist as you'll ever see in the Western world. No real classes - the working class/middle class was just one grey mass and the only upper class were those close to the Wallenberg family, lots of state-owned companies, welfare for everyone, free education, heavy taxes (immensly popular author Astrid Lindgren destroyed the Social Democratic rule for a few years when she was angry about needing to pay 101% in taxes), extremely powerful trade unions, strong employment laws, support of the rights of the poor all over the world (Palme was paying pretty much half of the ANC in the struggle against apartheid) etc. - things people would associate with communism if they knew what communism was.

Starting with Olof Palmes death however, Sweden has become less socialist/communist with every passing day so there has been a massive change in the last 35 years. A lot of things remain but without the power struggle of the past (the governments since Palme have all been in bed with the US & Wallenberg) it only goes in one direction - less social justice and more power and money accumulated at the top.

Marxist ideas goes well with democracy, there is no problem combining the two - but that is mainly because if people had a truly Marxist rulership, they would rarely if ever vote for anything else, because people like good pay, small differences (if any) between classes, long holidays, safe employment, free education, affordable housing and so forth.

Liberals and conservatives say that these things aren't possible. But they are possible, it has been proven, as long as they are allowed to be possible. But as I said before... whenever a Marxist party/individual gets in charge of a country, the US and their colonies (like Sweden and UK) will do their utmost to murder those who are trying to create a socially fair society. People will either ignore it or call it a conspiracy theory (despite all the proof of the US overthrowing socialist governments and leaders in South America etc.) but thats the reality of it. Marxist ideas can be the core in a society, if it was allowed by the elite.

Good, seems you've learned a bit.

 

[Swansman]

I've at least learnt a bit about succinctness.

Yeah you don't have Boris Johnson or Donald Trump as leaders for several years in a society where people are capable of reading books or longer articles. Succinctness is definitely important in a world where most people don't have the intellectual capacity to get past the headlines.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Yeah you don't have Boris Johnson or Donald Trump as leaders for several years in a society where people are capable of reading books or longer articles. Succinctness is definitely important in a world where most people don't have the intellectual capacity to get past the headlines.

This would be an excellent come back, if I hadn't in fact read your post.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I've at least learnt a bit about succinctness.

Some of the posts on this thread are positively Barber-esque in length. I've read shorter books by Houellebecq

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

Some of the posts on this thread are positively Barber-esque in length. I've read shorter books by Houellebecq

I've read books shorter than Houellebecq's name.

 

[Swansman]

Some of the posts on this thread are positively Barber-esque in length. Someone has read shorter books by Houellebecq

Didn't know you are a Houellebecq reading connoisseur... you strike me more as someone who'd much prefer going to the galleries enjoying the works of the great Pierre Brassau.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Didn't know you are a Houellebecq reading connoisseur... you strike me more as someone who'd much prefer going to the galleries enjoying the works of the great Pierre Brassau.

Only an ape could post such a thing

 

[raymondo]

Communist... well, certainly socialist and with a real attempt of taking a huge step towards communism in the 1960s-1970s when the minister of finances suggested that all Swedish workers should be co-owners in whatever company they worked for.

In 1970, around 40% of the Swedes worked for the state, another 40% worked for Wallenberg (Saab, Volvo, Ericsson, Astra etc.) and the rest for various smaller companies.

There was a power struggle between Social Democrats who under Olof Palme wanted to go further left (though they didn't want the Communist Party to have any power as they were in bed with Soviet) and Wallenberg who wanted Sweden to head into right-politics.

This power struggle had many layers.

The Wallenbergs were great friends with CIA-director Allen Dulles and didn't mind helping them getting the Swedish Intelligency Services (SÄPO) under direct American command, as controlling the security services is key to make things happen. The boss over at SÄPO said no, but the Swedish Social Democrats knew they'd come again (which they did) and started their own intelligence service (the IB).

With one secret force pushing Sweden towards the right and one pushing it towards the left, Sweden just remained a social democratic country never really taking the step over to the right-wing no-power-or-money-to-the-people thing most of the world was doing and also not a step into communism (the idea to have all Swedish workers owning shares in companies they worked for was called off due to pressure from Wallenberg).

This power struggle & compromise continued until Olof Palme was murdered and then Sweden could finally become a somewhat normal right-wing country (take from the poor, give to the rich) like all the others.

But indeed your professor was probably right that Sweden was as communist as you'll ever see in the Western world. No real classes - the working class/middle class was just one grey mass and the only upper class were those close to the Wallenberg family, lots of state-owned companies, welfare for everyone, free education, heavy taxes (immensly popular author Astrid Lindgren destroyed the Social Democratic rule for a few years when she was angry about needing to pay 101% in taxes), extremely powerful trade unions, strong employment laws, support of the rights of the poor all over the world (Palme was paying pretty much half of the ANC in the struggle against apartheid) etc. - things people would associate with communism if they knew what communism was.

Starting with Olof Palmes death however, Sweden has become less socialist/communist with every passing day so there has been a massive change in the last 35 years. A lot of things remain but without the power struggle of the past (the governments since Palme have all been in bed with the US & Wallenberg) it only goes in one direction - less social justice and more power and money accumulated at the top.

Marxist ideas goes well with democracy, there is no problem combining the two - but that is mainly because if people had a truly Marxist rulership, they would rarely if ever vote for anything else, because people like good pay, small differences (if any) between classes, long holidays, safe employment, free education, affordable housing and so forth.

Liberals and conservatives say that these things aren't possible. But they are possible, it has been proven, as long as they are allowed to be possible. But as I said before... whenever a Marxist party/individual gets in charge of a country, the US and their colonies (like Sweden and UK) will do their utmost to murder those who are trying to create a socially fair society. People will either ignore it or call it a conspiracy theory (despite all the proof of the US overthrowing socialist governments and leaders in South America etc.) but thats the reality of it. Marxist ideas can be the core in a society, if it was allowed by the elite.

Good, seems you've learned a bit.

@Swansman I hope that you teach in higher education, or plan to one day. You have a very detailed knowledge of political and social history in many countries (not only Sweden). You have strong opinions, and I guess many teachers have. Anyhow, hope you can (or are) use your knowledge in an educational place somehow.

 

[Swansman]

@Swansman I hope that you teach in higher education, or plan to one day. You have a very detailed knowledge of political and social history in many countries (not only Sweden). You have strong opinions, and I guess many teachers have. Anyhow, hope you can (or are) use your knowledge in an educational place somehow.

Its a mid/long-term plan. Subverting the yoof!

 

[raymondo]

Its a mid/long-term plan. Subverting the yoof!

It's ok to 'subvert the yoof' () so long as you help them develop the tools to make their own analysis

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

In what regard would you describe the Communist Party as communist? Do think the people have the power? Do you think the workers control the means of production? Do you think there's no social classes in China, no wealthy people owning property?

Communist states always had social classes and wealthy people owning property.

Let's not pretend that the wealthiest in China aren't like the Oligarchs in Russia and are people who were favoured by the highest echelons of the state officials.

 

[Swansman]

Communist states always had social classes and wealthy people owning property.

Let's not pretend that the wealthiest in China aren't like the Oligarchs in Russia and are people who were favoured by the highest echelons of the state officials.

If they have social classes, they are not communist states even if they call themselves communist states, because there's no social classes in communism.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

If they have social classes, they are not communist states even if they call themselves communist states, because there's no social classes in communism.

State capitalism has existed under communist rule.

It's why communism is nothing but a massive lie and delusion. Nothing more than the left version of fascism.

 

[Swansman]

State capitalism has existed under communist rule.

It's why communism is nothing but a massive lie and delusion. Nothing more than the left version of fascism.

What communist rule?

In order to have a communist state, you have to have a communist ideology. Otherwise it is not a communist state.

Russia is not a democracy just because they claim to be one. China is not a communist country just because they claim to be one. And if I claim to be the Queen of England, it doesn't make me the Queen of England... because in all these cases, there are critera that needs to be fulfilled for these things to be true. And there is no state that has lived up to Communist criteria, so there has been no communist countries or rulers (although some tried but barely got halfway).